Morality without God

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar said:
Then you are faced with the same question pmp ran away from.

So God puts morality into bonobos and capuchin monkeys? Do they have souls?

Why do we need to the supposed word of God delivered and possibly corrupted by man to tell us what is moral if he fills us with this knowledge?
Click to expand...

Animals have no souls, and animals have no morality!
 
Independent said:
Those that are "faithist" are human and fail. The difference is that they have the incentive to continue looking in the direction of "nice" even when they fail. Those who make their own morals can simply decide that nice is now not really a moral objective.
Click to expand...

Please, people of faith don't always bother with trying to be nice. Quite often, they rationalize genocide or state action to repress those who disagree.

Whether you are moral or not has nothing to with your claims of faith or lack of it.
 
patriot66 said:
Animals have no souls, and animals have no morality!
Click to expand...
I do not know if animals have a soul or not. Scripture does not really address that issue as far as I know. There are, however, animals in the afterlife. "The lion will lay down with the lamb." As for morality, I disagree. There are plenty of cases where animals have acted in such a way to insinuate that they do.
 
Sir Digby Chicken Caesar said:
So then what, you are just another believer afraid to deal with the evidence presented that primates act morally and display signs of empathy?
Click to expand...

Animals have instincts....they fight when threatened, not out of hate, they seek and even build shelter from the elements, the maternal instinct may even carry over to
other species....Hens will nurture puppies, dogs will nurture kittens, etc...not out of empathy but out of instinct....
They will also develop attachments to other animals, or humans, or even objects....you may call it love but its really fulfilling an instinct some have to bond....

We have the same kind of instincts but because we have a conscience and exert control over them to a great degree, we call them emotions
 
Last edited:
NOVA said:
Animals have instincts....they fight when threatened, not out of hate, they seek and even build shelter from the elements, the maternal instinct may even carry over to
other species....Hens will nurture puppies, dogs will nurture kittens, etc...not out of empathy but out of instinct....
They will also develop attachments to other animals, or humans, or even objects....you may call it love but its really fulfilling an instinct some have to bond....

We have the same kind of instincts but because we have a conscience and exert control over them to a great degree, we call them emotions
Click to expand...

But where in scripture does it say that they do not.
 
NOVA said:
Animals have instincts....they fight when threatened, not out of hate, they seek and even build shelter from the elements, the maternal instinct may even carry over to
other species....Hens will nurture puppies, dogs will nurture kittens, etc...not out of empathy but out of instinct....
They will also develop attachments to other animals, or humans, or even objects....you may call it love but its really fulfilling an instinct some have to bond....

We have the same kind of instincts but because we have a conscience and exert control over them to a great degree, we call them emotions
Click to expand...

Your response is nothing but semantic bullshit.

It's not instinctual or a fixed pattern of behavior. They are responding to the actions of others and deciding how to behave accordingly. If it were all instinctual then there would be no need for some chimpanzees to act as peacemakers between two fighting chimps and instead the fighting chimps would act in a fixed pattern.

When the trisomic macaques acts towards the alpha male in a way that instinct tells them is threatening the forgiving response is not instinctual. They are showing empathy.

You should try actually reading for a change and opening your mind instead of trying to force everything to fit your old and outdated notions.
 
Independent said:
Those that are "faithist" are human and fail. The difference is that they have the incentive to continue looking in the direction of "nice" even when they fail. Those who make their own morals can simply decide that nice is now not really a moral objective.
Click to expand...

Absolute, pure, unadulterated bollocks.

Do you actually have a 'position' in your church/chapel/garden shed? Or are you simply an avid follower?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top