| Grey Acumen said: In order for God to be able to be disproved, one would first have to know what god is. By definition god exists above our level of comprehension, hence is impossible to disprove. Anyone who actually makes an argument against God's existence can only do so based off of their own comprehension of what God is "supposed" to be, but all that does is prove that their comprehension of god is mistaken. Why do I know God exists? The very fact that we ask ourselves what the purpose of life is, the very fact that we question existence and how the world works, the very fact that despite everything we have learned, we still do not understand everything, everything is evidence. On top of this, the spontaneous moral standards are what I see as the most undeniable proof. Lying, Murder, Adultery, Stealing are all obstacles to forming a strong society, and yet these are also things that any individual would be able to benefit from if they had no moral standards to begin with. If a lion sees another lion eating something, and he's hungry, then if he's big enough to take the other lion's food, he will. This would likely be the lion that all others would have to defer to, so why would he impose rules that would no longer allow him to do this? The moral rules that are the fiber of society are made to protect the weak from the strong, yet nature dictates that the strong survive and the weak are culled. On top of this, morals are not part of instinct. They are purely learned behaviors. Any kid in the playground will attempt to take a toy from another kid if he has an interest in it, until he has been taught that is wrong to do. So with this in mind, there HAS to have been some point at which man was taught these lessons, and it could not come from a natural force, as those rules are directly opposed to natural selection. |
You give humanity too little credit. We are capable of learning from experience, and we have learned that when some things happen to us we don't like it. We have also learned that when we do something to someone, there is the possibility that it can happen. Humans (generally) have had it ingrained in their most basic understanding of interpersonal relationships that not offending others will typically lead to reciprocal behaviour which is a desired state. You can consider it a social contract of sorts. We learned proper behaviour by analyzing what we do and don't like done to us. The golden rule really is golden.
And of course as social skills began building in early humans. We obviously didn't start off knowing morals as a species, though that should be obvious since some people continue to add more rules as time has passed. Social evolution has not stopped.
You do not have the right to never be offended.
