I have a good friend who's an ExMo who's still a Christian who asked me that question recently. He really needs religion because he used to be a hard core drug addict and without it he thinks he'll just go back to using drugs and end up in prison or dead. He might be right so I don't try to convince him otherwise. But my response to that is, "Look around. Every species knows the rules of survival and they follow them. I don't think that humans are a hell of a lot different. We had rules of survival before we had religion. I mean even monkeys have a very well developed sense of what's right and what's wrong. Try giving one monkey a grape and the other monkey a soybean and see what happens. We probably got it the same way. What's good and right is what helps us to survive. What's wrong or 'evil' is what leads to our not surviving. I think religion is just a survival mechanism, which worked to unite us in the past, but has since turned into something that just divides us now. Combine that with nukes and it's a recipe for pure evil."

He wasn't buying that. He thinks that without religion to tell us the difference between right and wrong, we have no clue. I said, "How about empathy? If you empathize with others, there's now way you'd commit a crime against them you wouldn't want to be committed against you."

He didn't buy that either and still insisted without religion, we'd have no way to tell the difference between right and wrong.

I asked, "What about your conscience?"

He said we get morality and our conscience from God/religion.

I quoted Einstein who said that a man’s actions are determined by necessity, external and internal and if people do good out of fear of punishment or the hope of receiving some kind of a reward in the next life, then we are a very sad lot indeed.

He of course disagreed and thought that was all the motivation he needed to choose to be a good Dad and stay off of drugs.

I left it at that.

Well, we know people using religion to distinguish good from evil vary wildly in what they determine is good or evil. The Bible, for example, is a horrible moral guide which is why Christians need to cherry pick whatever they want all the time. It isn't a consistent or effective guide for morals for sure.

If someone can't distinguish good from evil without religion, let's hope they sit in church 24/7 because they could not be trusted to be good people if they ever lost their faith.

There are many books written on this subject that point out some fallacies religious people like to make. Shermer's (I know, he's sort of weird) The Science of Good and Evil is one.

It sounds like your friend needs a stick or carrot to function and fears he might go off the rails if he had to depend on his own conscience like non-religious folks. Using his statement, wouldn't he assume non religious people got a conscience from a God too? We know throughout evolution both good and bad behavior aided perpetuation of the gene pool. We all know life is easier when we are good (collaborate, help each other, etc.) so our offspring can survive.

Maybe your friend is not into the biology, psychology or anthropology behind how we determine morals. His religion told him what to think about the topic probably using a god for an authority figure. Religion creates the disease and purports to be the only one with the cure.

I suppose some of the philosophy dilemmas where you have to decide which choice is the more moral decision would blow his mind (e.g. is it more moral to murder one person if it saved 3?) Sometimes morals don't fit the dogmatic mind and might be relative depending on the situation (was Robin Hood moral or a thief?).

dagny Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, we know people using religion to distinguish
> good from evil vary wildly in what they determine
> is good or evil. The Bible, for example, is a
> horrible moral guide which is why Christians need
> to cherry pick whatever they want all the time. It
> isn't a consistent or effective guide for morals
> for sure.
>
> If someone can't distinguish good from evil
> without religion, let's hope they sit in church
> 24/7 because they could not be trusted to be good
> people if they ever lost their faith.
>
> There are many books written on this subject that
> point out some fallacies religious people like to
> make. Shermer's (I know, he's sort of weird) The
> Science of Good and Evil is one.
>
> It sounds like your friend needs a stick or carrot
> to function and fears he might go off the rails if
> he had to depend on his own conscience like
> non-religious folks. Using his statement, wouldn't
> he assume non religious people got a conscience
> from a God too? We know throughout evolution both
> good and bad behavior aided perpetuation of the
> gene pool. We all know life is easier when we are
> good (collaborate, help each other, etc.) so our
> offspring can survive.
>
> Maybe your friend is not into the biology,
> psychology or anthropology behind how we determine
> morals. His religion told him what to think about
> the topic probably using a god for an authority
> figure. Religion creates the disease and purports
> to be the only one with the cure.
>
> I suppose some of the philosophy dilemmas where
> you have to decide which choice is the more moral
> decision would blow his mind (e.g. is it more
> moral to murder one person if it saved 3?)
> Sometimes morals don't fit the dogmatic mind and
> might be relative depending on the situation (was
> Robin Hood moral or a thief?).


I hate to make it sound like he's not a good guy. He's really the most good hearted, intelligent, great Dad, liberal, open minded, people I know. I'm pretty sure he frequents this place, among others. We have gotten in some pretty intense arguments on line and then in person, at restaurants outside people are like, WOW, I can't believe you're having this discussion at a TJ Tacos.

But we did. And it was fine.

He just believes he NEEDs religion.

I don't disagree with him. If you heard him describe his life before he found Jesus, you'd know what I was talking about. sex, DRUGS and Rock N' Roll all night long. Finally caught up with him. He ended up in prison. Got out and decided he'd had enough of that life. Gave it all up and went to church. Did a lot of research. Joined this church called "Mars Hill" which is the very definition of a New Age Christian Mega Church.
I always had a distaste for shucksters I met on the road leading big mega churches. It's really TOTAL bullshit. It has to do with denying science really. And coming up with all kinds of "Intelligent Design" arguments, which is just rehashed Creationism. Patriarchal Bullshit is what it is.

But it fulfilled many of the needs we didn't just quit having once we lost our faith in Jesus, God and Joseph.
He found community there and meaning.
He found acceptance there and inclusion.
He found music there and he loved music.
So there it is. Music.
We both loved music and sang all the time.
He'd drink a couple of beers and sing Sandman by Metalica.
And kill it.
And go home to say his prayers with is his little ones.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/08/2020 10:42PM by schrodingerscat.

All systems get arbitrary at some point.

But consider maximizing among these ideals

Harm reduction
Fairness
Freedom

dogbloggernli Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> All systems get arbitrary at some point.
>
> But consider maximizing among these ideals
>
> Harm reduction
> Fairness
> Freedom

Cool. Kinda reminds me of the Dalai Lama's saying,

"Do no harm.
and allow no harm to be done to you."

All humans have needs.   All humans have wants.

I say 'power' is created as a consequence of the ebb and flow of desire and fulfillment.



As a child, when food was put in front of you, did you question its provenance? Did you wonder if someone went without so that you could have all you wanted to eat?

When someone loved you, did you knowingly take from them more than you returned?



What would a world be like where the material hungers of food & shelter could be conveniently satisfied?



Could there ever be a world in which everyone would be loved/cherished 100% of the time?



An argument could be crafted that eligion = placebo.



The Bill Shaped Curve demands that there be suffering, so that joy can be appreciated.



"Nobody knows the troubles I've seen"
--Santa Claus

> The Bill Shaped Curve demands that there be
> suffering, so that joy can be appreciated.

I'd think that depends on how Bill is built.

Eagles have curved bills. An eagle can peck your eye out.

The bills in my wallet are curved when I fold it. You can buy anything in this world for money.

Bells have a curve, but I'm always left wondering, for whom the bell tolls.

A curve is the ebb and flow of a line.

"Ask not for whom the bill tolls. It tolls for thee when thou crossest the bridge into New Jersey."

--Christopher Donne Christie, Newt of Newark

I'd say your friend is generally right. Let's bring some facts to the table. "Conscience" is not some mystical paranormal force, it's belief of what's right and wrong. The only way to know right and wrong is to be taught right and wrong. Society and judges decide what's wrong, our English Common Law, which is ancient, is based on precedence (past experiences), not on some abstract mystical force, or divine decree, or even the whims of the King.

Even the biblical laws are written in this format. As the Hebrews progressed they added law upon law. And the Jews ended up with so many that they can't possibly remember them all. But before the Flood there was a lot of freedom.

Empathy isn't trustworthy, it's a feeling, it's not rational. We can't all agree on what is the loving action. Take for instance lgbt marriage, over half the population believes love is love and it's right. A little less than half think it's not marriage, and that it's based on lust not love. So which side is right?

Religion answers the questions that humans can't agree on. Such as what's legitimate empathy.

Are you really saying there is such a thing as "illegitimate empathy?"

"before the flood..."

You're still sticking with that? Do you realize how many millions of cubic miles of water it would take to do that? Or how much water is in a cubic mile? There are parts of Utah that probably haven't had a cubic mile of rain total since the end of the last Ice Age (20,000 years ago). Think Wendover.

Noah's flood, if it happened at all, was a local event. No ark. No floating from Missouri to Turkey, I don't care how convincing you find bronze-age folk legends. Did. Not. Happen.

Noah's flood was a story. Like Harry Potter.

>> "Religion answers the questions that humans can't agree on. Such as what's legitimate empathy."

Religions "answers" are illegitimate. They are the reason humans can't answer their own questions. When religions empathy costs humans money, time, talent, and all that you poss....etc., it becomes illegitimate.

And please do explain the religious answers that humans have agreed upon. Thanks.

In other words, you (they) got nowhere.

Some people will never open their mind. Perhaps it's rusted shut, or they didn't know they could, or maybe it would be too complicated for them. It's usually fear, insecurity, and/ or a lack of interest.

They think they know it all, which is a very good indication they don't.

ufotofu Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> In other words, you (they) got nowhere.

Well, he's still Christian and I'm still a naturalist, if that's what you mean. I'm not trying to convert him to my way of thinking, just curious about the idea of "good" vs. "evil". It's an age old discussion that continues. I don't think there's any absolutely right or wrong. It's all relative. Everything is relative. He believes it's absolute, it comes from God.
End of story. Which is what prevents him from being a drug addict and a criminal. Instead he's a good Dad and a psychologist, who helps a lot of people recover from abusive CULTs like Mormonism.

> Some people will never open their mind. Perhaps
> it's rusted shut, or they didn't know they could,
> or maybe it would be too complicated for them.
> It's usually fear, insecurity, and/ or a lack of
> interest.
>
> They think they know it all, which is a very good
> indication they don't.

Yeah, he'd definitely fit that bill. Love the guy. He's one of my best friends, and he's not about to change any time soon. Although he realizes that the state of evangelical Christianity is pretty sad these days. He really focuses on the poetic aspects of Christ's words and not so much "the Church" aspects of the religion, which is cool with me.
It's a lot like trying to convince a Flat Earther that the Earth is round. No amount of evidence is going to convince them.

Wait, he helps people free themselves from the 'church'/ cult but he stays stuck in it?

Some people...

ufotofu Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Wait, he helps people free themselves from the
> 'church'/ cult but he stays stuck in it?
>
> Some people...

Yes he is a psychologist who specializes in counseling people who are recovering from CULT deprogramming, but he's not a member of any church. He's just Christian, meaning he believes in Jesus Christ, he just doesn't believe in any one particular church. He was attending the Mars Hill Church until it's founder got kicked out for abuse and it got shut down.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Hill_Church#Driscoll's_resignation

schrodingerscat Wrote:
--------------------------------------------------
> he is a psychologist
=============================
So he is cursed with intelligence, a double-edged sword

> but he's not a member of any
> church.
=============================
So it is not religion per se he seeks

> He's just Christian, meaning he believes
> in Jesus Christ,
=============================
So is it the need for a moral universe?

Is the question at core existential.

Okay my bad.

Church is okay
Cults are not

I find it very sad, indeed, that anyone would need religion to determine good from evil :(

You haven't defined "good" or "evil".
I say cilantro is evil.

Religion is good for young people just starting out. They’ve figured out which behaviors will cause a lot of trouble so you don’t have to. The Mormon way of “if it feels true it is true” has a certain utility in the context of a mystical theism. If that’s all there were to Mormonism, I wouldn’t have a problem with it.

The downside to safety is a certain naivety that you carry to the grave. Your moral choices were made for you. It leads to emotionally stunted adults.

"Religion is good for young people" ...
No. It is not.

Any group that considers coffee evil has no standing for passing judgement about anything being good or evil.

A large majority of the world is not Christian. They don't seem particularly more or less moral than those who believe in Jesus, whatever that means.

Even dogs and cats know right from wrong, though cats don't care all that much. Even cats know enough to perform malicious acts when the victim is not looking. They are evil, not stupid. :)

I can't remember who, but the other day someone said s/he didn't like the word "evil." Any idea who that was, BoJ?

;)

I decided to go with sloppy language in an effort to blend with local fauna.

I think that everything good I learned at church I also learned from my family -- but I had a good, stable family with good values. Not everyone has that. As a teacher, I've seen the result of what happens when children do not get adequate guidance at home. It's not pretty! Increasingly, schools are being asked to pick up the slack, and it is just asking too much. We can't raise a room full of children and teach them academics at the same time. We can't make up for what is lacking at home.

It is certainly true that sometimes children who come from dysfunctional families turn out all right. Yes, that does happen, and we have some examples of that on this board. But my experience is that more often than not, dysfunctional families raise dysfunctional, maladjusted children.

Scat, it could be that your friend is telling you that there was no other place in which he could get adequate guidance. Or that he needs some sort of support group to stay on the straight and narrow. Church works for some people. But it is not necessary for all people. Humans are pro-social beings by nature, and I think many of us could get it figured out without church. But other people need supports of one kind or another.

summer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Scat, it could be that your friend is telling you
> that there was no other place in which he could
> get adequate guidance. Or that he needs some sort
> of support group to stay on the straight and
> narrow. Church works for some people. But it is
> not necessary for all people. Humans are
> pro-social beings by nature, and I think many of
> us could get it figured out without church. But
> other people need supports of one kind or another.

I agree.

Whatever the underlying reason(s) may be, some people need an external structure in order to figure out how to deal with the black/white/grey areas of life.

[Although this "external structure" often is religious, it doesn't necessarily have to be religious. In some societies (contemporary China, for example) there may be a political, or an accepted social, external structure which serves the same purpose of distinguishing good from evil.]

Yes, I agree. For some children, after-school centers such as Boys and Girls Clubs make all the difference in the world. Scouting, 4-H, etc. can be helpful as well.

I just feel that churches and religious organizations should not be abusive or harmful.

Basic human morality existed prior to any form of organized religion, and is universal regardless of what part of the world and what the predominant religion or superstition of the area is. This is because our concept of right and wrong developed out of our need for survival as a species. When ancient humans and their close relatives lived in small, nomadic hunter/gatherer groups of 20-40 people, you had to work together to ensure your survival. Killing a member of your tribe would weaken your tribe, hurting both the tribe and your own chance for survival. So you did not kill people within your tribe (thou shall not kill). Stealing from a member of your tribe might hinder their ability to do their job which contributed to the survival of the tribe, so you did not steal from your tribe (thou shall not steal). Essentially the common foundation for human morality can be traced to back when we existed in those small hunter/gather groups. They are not rooted in religion, they are rooted in our basic need for survival.

This is good.

> Essentially the common foundation
> for human morality can be traced
> to back when we existed in those
> small hunter/gather groups. They
> are not rooted in religion, they
> are rooted in our basic need for
> survival.


When I was in a small hunter/gatherer group, all us small guys had to watch out for the big guys. The big guys got the best cuts of meat, the best mates, etc., etc., freakin' etc.!

Woe betide the beta male who tried to take cuts!

Women were not treated that well when the big guys got horny, which was pretty much all the time the sun was down and they weren't sleeping. Women had it very, very bad.

I never met an alpha male who ever gave a thought to anything other than his own needs and pleasures. Even their own kids suffered at their hands!

And many is the time we'd meet outcasts from a group who'd been cast adrift because he challenged the big guys or she wasn't always a willing participant/slave.

I don't want to go back to those days, which according to Zombie moves & TV, would be easy to do.

But this is all just my personal experience. What the hell do i know?

And then a TBM family moves in next door. . .