ChatterBank1 min ago
Moral Authority
49 Answers
Without God, where do atheists look for an objective moral authority to determine absolute right and wrong?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Theland. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
Morality is fairly simple in principle . . . perhaps a bit more complicated in practice.
Morality is that which promotes the wellbeing of those with the capacity to reason, learn and choose. Without options there can be no moral imperatives. Options arise from our ability to grasp the nature of reality and our relationship to it. Morality follows from the will and desire to determine what is in our mutual best interest and an appreciation for the value in making such determinations correctly.
As for the source of moral authority, reality is the final arbiter of right and wrong based on a realisation of the consequences that arise from our actions that comes with years and generations of experience and understanding of that reality and those consequences.
What's right is that which promotes knowledge and understanding of what is ultimately in our best interest, the choices that are available to us and the will to chose that which adds value to our existence. Armed with reason and knowledge we enter the arena of the potential to become moral beings.
Morality is that which promotes the wellbeing of those with the capacity to reason, learn and choose. Without options there can be no moral imperatives. Options arise from our ability to grasp the nature of reality and our relationship to it. Morality follows from the will and desire to determine what is in our mutual best interest and an appreciation for the value in making such determinations correctly.
As for the source of moral authority, reality is the final arbiter of right and wrong based on a realisation of the consequences that arise from our actions that comes with years and generations of experience and understanding of that reality and those consequences.
What's right is that which promotes knowledge and understanding of what is ultimately in our best interest, the choices that are available to us and the will to chose that which adds value to our existence. Armed with reason and knowledge we enter the arena of the potential to become moral beings.
It's strange (at least to me) that many of the answers to Theland's pertinent question are themselves, questions.
Point is, consience, knowledge of right and wrong, care about others is inherent only in the human species. It cannot be demonstrated elsewhere in the animal kingdom. Hence, why only humans? I thas to be attributed to something else other than evolution since, if that behavior were beneficial it woul have developed in othe species.
I would say that Chris' reply is cogent only in that those societies that have developed the ability to exist without (or at least greatly diminished) consience have easily demonstrated what such a society becomes... look no farhter than Nazi Germany.
Point is, consience, knowledge of right and wrong, care about others is inherent only in the human species. It cannot be demonstrated elsewhere in the animal kingdom. Hence, why only humans? I thas to be attributed to something else other than evolution since, if that behavior were beneficial it woul have developed in othe species.
I would say that Chris' reply is cogent only in that those societies that have developed the ability to exist without (or at least greatly diminished) consience have easily demonstrated what such a society becomes... look no farhter than Nazi Germany.
///knowledge of right and wrong, care about others is inherent only in the human species. It cannot be demonstrated elsewhere in the animal kingdom. //
Food for thought.
http://
Food for thought.
http://
From Naomi's link I found this
http://
http://
