William Lane Craig argues that, without God, moral values would only be subjective, and there would be no ultimate moral accountability.
i do certainly agree with William Lane Craig....it is because of our belief in existence of GOD that bestows the human beings with objective moral values and duties...
The question is incorrectly posed. The answer depends on which category of people the author has in mind. Obviously, God is invented for the crowd, to whom this invention must give existence in conditions of stability. To the strongman of this world, nothing prevents being immoral when they formally recognize the existence of God. In any case, if humanity did not invent God before, it should be invented right now.
I think we should not comment so harsh. I know one fellow well known as an atheist but very much honest in every aspects of life. Very few religious people may be so honest. He is a school teacher.
How can you explain this?
How can you explain this?
I do not agree with this view
Because the human societies existed before religions and have a lot of ethics and values, but after the continuation of religions on these communities began to these religions to refine these values and ethics in accordance with the principles of those religions and with ensuring of the achievement of human justice.
The existence of God is a proven reality, that is how come there are robust and well-structured moral values and duties. This is seen not only in the human fold but also in all living things. The existence of God is evident in His marvelous creations that steadily follow nature's harmonious moral laws. Best regards
This is a type 4 question. In order to underpin objective moral values and duties, god would have to exist objectively. However, gods only exist as beliefs. Hence, there is nothing objective about the moral values that are based upon the supposed wishes of a god whose existence is in principle unprovable.
To state that anything is a proven reality is incomplete: a thing can be a proven reality to a particular person, but this does not give it objective existence. Pre-Newtonian gravity was a proven reality to everyone (objects tended to move towards their natural resting place), but this did not mean that this notion of gravity had an objective existence, or even that it was proven by the fact that objects fell downwards.
And now, back to research…
Some people live in a culture where God is seen as existing other people live in cultures where this is not the case. It is okay if the idea of a highest power in heaven makes life for many better to manage. But the ability to act carefully, prosocial, ethically valuable has nothing to do with the kind or religion. There is - to day - in tolerant modernity no chance to claim, my religion or my God is better than yours. We live in a multi plural world community which should teach respect for the religious feelings of others.
Noooooooo, god has little role to play Prof !!!
Mortality is defined by us to lead a peaceful life on earth ...
I have to say , read Vedas they define Dharma -rule for a good human even god needs to follow !!! as I said that is Hinduism hence called "Sanatana Dharma" an eternal rule of righteousness ...
Is it okay stealing /hurting / etc etc without remorse , no such people do exist , that is left to them how they do that .
Eg: Church people/in the name of religion / Politics (stories that are current Prof !!!)
Let me put it this way, Kirk. What kind of person would a parent be, if the only reason he or she did all they could, for their children, was because they wanted a reward for themselves? I mean, other than the reward of seeing their children be the best that they can be? I think most parents do what they can for the children, with or without any personal gain.
Similarly, what kind of a person would strive to be just and fair, to be constructive instead of destructive, to work to make the world a better place, only because he or she expected a direct reward? I think it is hard coded in living organisms to do what it takes to promote survival of their species, without requiring a direct reward.
It should be extremely disquieting to think that people only behave like reasonable human beings because of some imagined, virtually "material" reward. And that failing such imagined reward, people would become raving lunatics or psychopaths.
Religions can be a great institution, to establish a well-defined moral code for that culture. Hopefully, to the extent possible, there will be some compatibility in these moral codes, among different cultures. But I hope and trust that religion is not the only reason for people to behave like sensible human beings!!
Although God does not exist, according to a certain religion, there are human beings with spiritual development in tone to culture, moral values and ethical principles
There are many things in the universe that we believed but we did not see like stomach pain, headache etc. Also, a small company would not be running without someone. Similarly, a vehicle need someone to run. Think how the whole universe will run without anyone. There must be someone to run this universe. the sun rises and set, day night, everything happens by someone and this is the GOD(ALLAH) who is doing this all. but our mind would not think about this, same is like the baby in the whoom of mother do not know about this world.
I agree with Shibabrata Pattanayak that you don't have to believe in whether God exists or not to be a good person. "Be not like those servants who serve their master for the sake of acknowledgment/reward," taught the first-century BCE Antigonus of Sukko. "Be rather like those servants who serve their master not for the sake of either" (Mishnah, Avot). The 18th-centur Rabbi Levi Yitzchak of Berditchev once declared: "Thank God for atheists!!" Seeing the puzzled look on the faces of his disciples, he explained: "A believer sees a person in need and says, 'No worry; God will take care of him,' and continues along on the road. An atheist, however, sees a person in need and says, 'Oy! There is no God!! I better take of him!"
Now, one might argue, and justifiably so, that without the moral guidance inspired by divine inspiration, we would indeed fashion our morality and values subjectively, which in turn could turn out very bad. This is true. But I must remind us all that, sadly, even with all of the caches of divinely-inspired guidance promulgated by the many well-meaning world religions, we humans have severely tainted much of it with our subjective interpretive applications anyway, twisting and distorting the most Godly of values to fit our subjective mortal agendas. Personally, I believe in God, and I also believe God steps back far enough to allow us the gift of doing the best we can whether we believe in God or not. I don't feel that God is slighted if we don't believe, or elated if we do. Rather, I believe God waits for us to start focusing on believing in ourselves, for a change.
We know, for example, that it is wrong to murder and steal. We don't need God to tell us this. Yet, that is exactly what God spent the precious revelation at Sinai 3,500 years ago telling my ancestors. Standing at Sinai I would have expected some high-falutin' mystery wisdom, some answers to questions like "Why do the innocent suffer? Why is there evil? Why mosquitoes?" and so on. Instead, I get this heavenly voice telling me stuff I already know. What a disappointment! Is this what I prepared for over a period of three days? Bummer.
Yet, the message is crystal clear. It is like God is telling us: "I know that you know that murdering people is wrong. But I want you to have my personal endorsement behind it, so that on a bad day, when things aren't as clear as usual, you won't justify murdering someone. Because if not murdering is based on your own invented value system you can always un-do it, alter it, re-interpret it, or suspend it to suit your personal agenda in the moment. But if it is I who tell you not to murder, then, if you are inclined to change the meaning of it, you better come see me first."
But alas! Belief in God has for most of human history failed abysmally in determining right morality. Therefore, atheist or believer, we hold the fragility of rightness and wrongness in our mortal hands. Like the story of the boy who challenged the master one day: "Master, I hold in my closed hand a small bird. Can you guess whether it is dead, or alive?" Said the master: "The answer lies in your hands, my son. For were I to say it is alive, you might crush it to prove me wrong."
No I do not agree to the proposition. Morality/immorality can be upheld even in the context of atheism for it bothers on human welfare and goodness. Some humans do good, i.e., morally, without reference to a god. They adhere to objective moral values and carry out their duties as taught in their communities not for a future reward from a god for doing so, or punishment for failing to do so. So for humanity's sake there still will be objective moral values and duties, even if god does not exit, there is the need for peace and order in societies.
Since birth; Every single human being knows what is good and what is bad. Every single person feel good when they do good things and feel stress when they do bad things. These are the human values and is itself is a religion without book. Because all human beings have this same attitute; it is enough evidence that there is only one God and is very close to our heart.
Morality comes as a result of the "Fear of God" and the believe in His Existence. Of the truth, God exists!!!
In reality, morality is a human phenomenon, the product of our evolution as a social species, and “good” and “evil” have nothing to do with any god. The concepts of “good” and “evil” and “virtue” and “vice”, then, do not suddenly lose all meaning if God does not exist, in the same way as the concepts of “true” and “false” remain unchanged.
Atheists prefer to base their morality on the potential of human beings to mature morally, to assume ethical principles and respect them, not out of fear of some god, but rather because they recognize the value of these principles for their own quality of life and that of others around them.
If God doesn't exist, the right and values will become subjected to pragmatism.
God does not EXIST. Existenz is acatogory ofr creation.
Otherwise God would be a finite entity. But human finite mind knows it means something else using an always finite imagination God. The meaning of the imagination God consists in perceiving all constructions of finite mind are unable to create or garantee the consitution of existence. God or the infinite mind are the indeterminable consitutution of existence. This constitution is the fundamental transcendentality of human existence, there are no eternal values or determinations. These we must produce by discoursive reason. The old Aristotelian God Nietzsche was looking for at the marketplace is dead and the souverain God who can' be misused as a servant of of so-called sense of life made by finite mind reveals the frightening infinity, freedom and indetermination of human existence. Nietzsche has been in a non.mythological way the prophet of that souverain God o - the infinite mind as constitution of human existence.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Philosophy
- Ethics