Where Is Man's Inner Compass?

Discussion in 'Agnosticism and Atheism' started by Moonglow181, Mar 10, 2016.

  1. Moonglow181

    Moonglow181 Lifetime Supporter Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    16,175
    Likes Received:
    4,916
    and why does he need a book like the bible to tell him what is right and wrong?
    Doesn't he know himself or feel these things naturally?
    I have always wondered this.....

    There is a theory that the bible was left here by the aliens to keep us in some kind of moral compass line. Why?
    a moral compass isn't natural?

    I did not know where else to put this question, and I want to leave the religious threads alone. I am not here to stomp on anyone else's beliefs, but I do have questions.
     
    3 people like this.
  2. guerillabedlam

    guerillabedlam _|=|-|=|_

    Messages:
    29,419
    Likes Received:
    6,296
    I suppose the Bible as well as other Holy Texts are viewed as so efficient in maintaining moral behavior because of the transformative nature of "word" being static. (In reality, that's not really true but in the course of a lifetime, it's 'true enough')

    What I mean is... much like computers influence and shape much of our experience of reality today, I am assuming holy texts had/have a similar impact in their own sphere of appeal, which incorporates morality and since it was "always" there, it may seem more reliable as reference than the he said/she said words of oral tradition.

    Moral compass probably resides on a spectrum with some aspects of morality seeming universal and self-evident, while others may be more culturally based and/or tenuous. It's probably in the latter examples where appeal to holy texts hold it's most power.
     
    1 person likes this.
  3. Emanresu

    Emanresu Member

    Messages:
    626
    Likes Received:
    69
    Natural morality is not such a great thing. The natural morality possessed by the average human evolved not for goodness but simply for biological fitness. This is why it is possible for someone to be morally outraged by a transgression against someone in the same group, but feel no outrage when the same act is carried out against members of another group. That is a shortcoming of natural morality. People need to be taught to expand their moral spheres to include beings that would fall outside of the moral sphere in terms of natural evolution and biological fitness.

    I do not think that the Bible is capable of helping here, because someone must already have higher morals in place before reading the Bible so that they know to ignore the nasty parts, but I do believe that natural morality is not enough.
     
    2 people like this.
  4. morrow

    morrow Visitor

    Wonder if the Bible was only being wrote now, what it would say?
    With the advancement of science, knowledge of man kind, pleasure, apathy, and history! Would morality be in there?
    Is it needed? Surely the knowledge of right and wrong, ( consequences ) morality would not exist.. There would just be a better version, and reasons, for right and wrong?
    After all, morals change!
     
    2 people like this.
  5. BlackBillBlake

    BlackBillBlake resigned HipForums Supporter

    Messages:
    11,504
    Likes Received:
    1,543
    So where would the morals that were already high enough to leave out the bad bits of the Bible originate if we exclude natural morality? From some other ethical system?
     
  6. BlackBillBlake

    BlackBillBlake resigned HipForums Supporter

    Messages:
    11,504
    Likes Received:
    1,543
    There are different stages of ethical or moral standards in human development. The earliest stage is that what is good for me as I perceive it is good. This though is always tempered by the fact that the will or desire of the individual has to be subordinated to the greater need of the group, the tribe, the clan.
    At a later stage we get the ethical or moral ideal defined by religions, philosophies or an admixture of both. As time goes on, this becomes more sophisticated and values change. Under the pressure of progress, old systems start to be inadequate to the needs of the day. That's the problem with 'once and for ever' type scriptures like the Bible and Koran.
    I think a later stage would be when people can be wholly self regulating and not need an external ethical system to govern their actions. How the masses of humans can move to that level is another question.
     
    3 people like this.
  7. It's because man doesn't feel he has the authority on his own to enforce his morals. If you say your morals are divine then they're all-powerful; God is fearless, flawless, and eternal. But if you say they come from man, then you're saying they come from small, impotent, afraid little mortals.

    I can imagine an alternative where people take great pride in being men, and pride in man's ability to distinguish what is moral from what is immoral. But I also think that what is moral and is immoral is empirically moral and immoral. So morality is intertwined with man's destiny, but it is also just the facts, and man has no control over the facts. Even if man decided to collectively enforce a warped sense of morality, there would still be a true morality independent of that.
     
  8. Emanresu

    Emanresu Member

    Messages:
    626
    Likes Received:
    69
    I'm not excluding natural morals, only stating that they can only get you part of the way. Natural morality plus a life time of learning. And of course not everyone who reads the Bible has reached the level of moral sophistication to be able to identify and ignore the nasty parts. Learning morality is apparently very hit or miss.
     
  9. Aerianne

    Aerianne Lifetime Supporter Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    37,095
    Likes Received:
    17,162
    Great thread.

    It's a shame I have a feeling it will get twisted and ruined.
     
  10. Emanresu

    Emanresu Member

    Messages:
    626
    Likes Received:
    69
    As long as the people who enjoy amicable rational conversations just focus on the posts by others who enjoy amicable and rational conversations everything will be just fine. I find myself ignoring more and more posts as time goes on. No point in descending into madness to argue with someone who has no intention of listening to what you say. On a positive note there was a thread about free will recently that went on for quite some time, with quite a bit of disagreement, and it remained amicable almost the entire time. That was literally the best thread I've ever been involved in on this site.

    Now excuse me while I derail this thread by pointing out how stupid everyone is who disagrees with me. Especially that emanresu jerk. I mean seriously, that guy is so dumb!
     
    2 people like this.
  11. themnax

    themnax Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,694
    Likes Received:
    4,465
    well it isn't something in the body, or in a book, or in anyway external to his own spirit, nor is it capable of being.
     
  12. Tyrsonswood

    Tyrsonswood Senior Moment Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    34,218
    Likes Received:
    26,293
    Next to his inner pocket knife?



    Just a guess...
     
    4 people like this.
  13. BlackBillBlake

    BlackBillBlake resigned HipForums Supporter

    Messages:
    11,504
    Likes Received:
    1,543
    Sadly you may be right.
     
  14. BlackBillBlake

    BlackBillBlake resigned HipForums Supporter

    Messages:
    11,504
    Likes Received:
    1,543
    The thing is though that in the course of a lifetime's learning, if you belong to any western society, it's likely you'd pick up some of the Biblical ethics in the course of that.
    Or maybe not. I only speak from my own experience of life, and when I was a kid, Christianity was taught to us in school from a young age - so I think that it had a role in forming the sense of right and wrong in people of my generation(at school in the 60's) right from the start.
     
  15. guerillabedlam

    guerillabedlam _|=|-|=|_

    Messages:
    29,419
    Likes Received:
    6,296
    That is essentially the basis of Kant's Categorical Imperative.
     
  16. Asmodean

    Asmodean Slo motion rider

    Messages:
    50,556
    Likes Received:
    10,126
    Wether it is natural or not, defined/constructed morals in a culture/society inevitably have their roots in the world of abstract concepts. (seem perfectly natural to me btw :))

    But what is Man's destiny? :p
     
  17. guerillabedlam

    guerillabedlam _|=|-|=|_

    Messages:
    29,419
    Likes Received:
    6,296
    To further elaborate on that for the OP: Kant thought that correct moral action (or inaction) is that which one thinks could be a universal law and/or maxim. There are aspects of humanism as well, which are meant to be incorporated, basically consider the qualities that make humans unique. He saw humans as autonomous and with reason have an innate capacity to understand morals.
     
  18. Emanresu

    Emanresu Member

    Messages:
    626
    Likes Received:
    69
    That is exactly the point I am disagreeing with. I went to Catholic schools from Kindergarten through highschool graduation. Mass every weekend, plus the first Friday of every month, plus every holiday. Religion classes every day. And yet I don't think that the Bible had anything to do with my moral development. It is my belief that the morals that my teachers were claiming were derived from the Bible were in fact already formed in their minds, and they then chose parts of the Bible that corresponded to the morals that they already believed in. I believe this has always been the case. In other words those morals are in the Bible because people believed them before they wrote the Bible.

    That doesn't mean that something like the Bible can't be useful in illustrating moral concerns. Reading about morality can bring our implicit moral assumptions to the surface, exposing them to further scrutiny and refinement. I just don't think morals are derived from such sources.

    I also don't believe people when they tell me that they derive their morals from the Bible. I guess I just think too highly of them. I know a woman who goes to Guatemala to help the poor. She claims that she does it because of the Bible. But I know that she is actually a good person, and if I proved that the Bible was wrong today I bet she would still go off to Guatemala tomorrow.

    I think that the fact that the average person has no trouble ignoring the nasty parts of the Bible is evidence of my position. Quote any nasty part of the Bible and any average Christian will tell you "Well we don't believe that!" How could they do that if they were getting their morality from the Bible?
     
    1 person likes this.
  19. BlackBillBlake

    BlackBillBlake resigned HipForums Supporter

    Messages:
    11,504
    Likes Received:
    1,543
    I'm not at all saying that the Bible is the only, or even the best source of morals. Just that in a society where morals are instilled in children based on the Bible it's hard to see where that ends and natural morality begins. The very teachers you mention were no doubt taught Christian morals themselves at a young age, and back through the generations. If there were people who had never been exposed to Christian morals who then took to the Bible and found it repeated their already existing attitudes, I'd agree they were merely finding confirmation. I'm pretty sure the teachers I had at school didn't come into that category, but were people whose whole moral outlook was shaped by their own Christian education.

    I agree that people were moral long before the Bible came into existence, and I don't think that there's anything superior in the Bible in terms of morality that you won't find in ancient Greece or India for example. Also, if one considers history, people who avowedly took their morality from the Bible, didn't have anything like the same ethical standards we have now. They were burning other human beings at the stake and other unpleasant things, yet found nothing in the Bible to stay their hand. Quite the reverse. It was on the basis of scripture that these abominations were enacted.
    I think the morality of the Bible is somewhat out of date in some ways.Not in all ways of course, as the basics of treating others as you would wish to be treated yourself doesn't vary over time. What does vary is the way we interpret those morals. Maybe there are people out there who would be happy to be burned alive because they were herbalists - but I don't think so.

    As for Christians who dismiss parts of the Bible they are not comfortable with, they seem to me to be in a bit of an untenable position, because Christians believe it's the word of God. Are they then saying that parts of God's word are bad or wrong or not applicable to them? Or that it needs updating to cater for our more developed sensibilities? If you take that view, the Bible would loose most of the authority which people vest in it.
     
  20. Moonglow181

    Moonglow181 Lifetime Supporter Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    16,175
    Likes Received:
    4,916
    I don't really mean man or society made moral codes or laws.....

    I mean the inner compass that tells you help someone in need and if not able to help, at least not hurt them....
    I mean the inner compass that cries and feels the pain of a screaming rabbit taken by a bird of prey...I have heard that sound, and it is terrible....left me with a sad feeling for a long time....
    I mean the kind of inner compass that when accidentally stepping on a a tiny turtle in childhood and not purposely cracking its outer shell and was told what you did....you felt bad about it forever.....and had nightmares....I am talking about these kinds of things.......
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice