This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
CopperCicada · M
Doing something because God said to is really the weakest form of morality in my mind. It's like not playing with matches because mom said so.
The only real substantial morality is one that understands the cause and effect of actions. Not just that actions have ethical consequences. But why. And I don't mean because God will be pissed off.
It's like not playing with matches because one knows that fire burns and that burns hurt. And one doesn't want others to hurt from burns. Or one doesn't play with matches because one knows fire can spread quickly and destroy things, and one doesn't want to destroy one's property or that of another. Or nature.
In my experience that first form of ethics, acting because God said so, or alternately, because some religious texts says so, is a dead end because it's driven by selfishness. Gaining God's favor, avoiding divine punishment.
It's also a dead end because understanding ethics as cause and effect, how our actions have ethical significance because of how they benefit or harm others-- really demands compassion and empathy.
I can pretty much tell where somebody is and if I'll be able to relate to them based on where they claim their values come from. Say that you don't rape because that makes God mad... versus that you don't rape because that would fuck up a person's life.
Legalistic morality doesn't support compassion. It also isn't pliant, flexible. There's no wisdom to it. Understanding cause and effect and the emotions that drive one's negativity does.
Which is another problem with legalistic God says morality. Unless we face the causal nature of actions and how our choices impact the world around us, and unless we understand how our emotions drive our negativity-- we'll always be looking for ways around the rules. And find them. Every time.
The only real substantial morality is one that understands the cause and effect of actions. Not just that actions have ethical consequences. But why. And I don't mean because God will be pissed off.
It's like not playing with matches because one knows that fire burns and that burns hurt. And one doesn't want others to hurt from burns. Or one doesn't play with matches because one knows fire can spread quickly and destroy things, and one doesn't want to destroy one's property or that of another. Or nature.
In my experience that first form of ethics, acting because God said so, or alternately, because some religious texts says so, is a dead end because it's driven by selfishness. Gaining God's favor, avoiding divine punishment.
It's also a dead end because understanding ethics as cause and effect, how our actions have ethical significance because of how they benefit or harm others-- really demands compassion and empathy.
I can pretty much tell where somebody is and if I'll be able to relate to them based on where they claim their values come from. Say that you don't rape because that makes God mad... versus that you don't rape because that would fuck up a person's life.
Legalistic morality doesn't support compassion. It also isn't pliant, flexible. There's no wisdom to it. Understanding cause and effect and the emotions that drive one's negativity does.
Which is another problem with legalistic God says morality. Unless we face the causal nature of actions and how our choices impact the world around us, and unless we understand how our emotions drive our negativity-- we'll always be looking for ways around the rules. And find them. Every time.
@CopperCicada
Yeah well said. I guess this drifts into the debate about whether theistic morality is superior or inferior to secular morality.
I agree that it's problematic to go the "because god said so" route. And you see it all the time when debating morality. Almost every time, some theist will ask some variation of "If there's no god then why don't you just rape and murder and steal".
Yeah well said. I guess this drifts into the debate about whether theistic morality is superior or inferior to secular morality.
I agree that it's problematic to go the "because god said so" route. And you see it all the time when debating morality. Almost every time, some theist will ask some variation of "If there's no god then why don't you just rape and murder and steal".
CopperCicada · M
@Pikachu I find the notion that it takes a metaphysical entity's proclamation to not fuck a child pretty terrifying. I mean, if God tells you not to touch the kids, and you don't-- rock it. But it means compassion really has nothing to do with it. That's incomprehensible to me.