By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - Hebrewism vs the world

Kasz216 said:
snakenobi said:
Kasz216 said:
snakenobi said:


people only follow the morality guidelines if religion tells them where they come from or where they will go if they follow a moral guideline

taken heaven and hell out of it and people start thinking themselves

The social contract would disagree with you... and in general, well society.

Plenty of atheists follow normal moral codes... and plenty of religious people have a hell of a time following their own religions moral codes.

Society in general needs a unified moral code to exist properly.  Otherwise a Social Contract could never really be achieved.

social contract can be achieved by law also

No it can't.  Laws are created as a representation of the Social Contract and draw it's authority from it.

In a world where the is no morality, laws can not exist because actions are completely subjective and nobody really holds a base overwhelming view.

 


but what does morality has to do with religion

 

yeah world soceity is still very much only moral because of GOD higher figure but alot of shit also happens because of clashes

its not that much better

 

and alot of blind faith and less use of critical thinking and soceital manners is what responsible for alot of bad thing in this world too



Around the Network
snakenobi said:
Kasz216 said:
snakenobi said:
Kasz216 said:
snakenobi said:


people only follow the morality guidelines if religion tells them where they come from or where they will go if they follow a moral guideline

taken heaven and hell out of it and people start thinking themselves

The social contract would disagree with you... and in general, well society.

Plenty of atheists follow normal moral codes... and plenty of religious people have a hell of a time following their own religions moral codes.

Society in general needs a unified moral code to exist properly.  Otherwise a Social Contract could never really be achieved.

social contract can be achieved by law also

No it can't.  Laws are created as a representation of the Social Contract and draw it's authority from it.

In a world where the is no morality, laws can not exist because actions are completely subjective and nobody really holds a base overwhelming view.

 


but what does morality has to do with religion

 

yeah world soceity is still very much only moral because of GOD higher figure but alot of shit also happens because of clashes

its not that much better

 

and alot of blind faith and less use of critical thinking and soceital manners is what responsible for alot of bad thing in this world too


A lot... at least as far as the West goes.  Western Morality was built around the arbhamic faiths to the point of where there isn't any other morality code based around anything else in western ideals.

Even western "atheist" morality movements that are more humanist are largely basing their morals off of the Abrhamic religions.  Really only that one "morality" tree grew out of the west.  Western Morality and Religion are pretty inseperable at the moment.  One only needs to look at the concept of "Natural Rights".

Compaired to say, Asia which has had multiple moral codes, including ones that are seemingly atheistic, like confusinism.   

Although Confusious himself likely beleived in Chinese Folk Religion.



Kasz216 said:


A lot... at least as far as the West goes.  Western Morality was built around the arbhamic faiths to the point of where there isn't any other morality code based around anything else in western ideals.

Even western "atheist" morality movements that are more humanist are largely basing their morals off of the Abrhamic religions.  Really only that one "morality" tree grew out of the west.  Western Morality and Religion are pretty inseperable at the moment.  One only needs to look at the concept of "Natural Rights".

Compaired to say, Asia which has had multiple moral codes, including ones that are seemingly atheistic, like confusinism.   

Although Confusious himself likely beleived in Chinese Folk Religion.

don't try to link athiest moral values to abrhamic religions.

missionaries are not humanist but more of saying you convert t our way of life and we provide you shelter.First the banking system that makes the planet poor  by running their own fiat currency ponzi schemes and then missionaries pretend they are the only ones that can help

whats life worth if you are just surviving and selling yourself away to a religion just for food.

 

almost all religions have this moral code as they need to have it for people to follow the religion.

 

its just that athiesm is based on logic and reasoning and thats why they are humanist.

 

what natural rights are there in abrahamic religion?

what western-abrhamic link-up you when abrahamic just came into west 2000 years ago,Roman republic was great cause it was based on trade not socialism and old USA was great cause they separated religion and state and again made free markets possible.



Kasz216 said:
snakenobi said:
Kasz216 said:
snakenobi said:
Kasz216 said:
snakenobi said:


people only follow the morality guidelines if religion tells them where they come from or where they will go if they follow a moral guideline

taken heaven and hell out of it and people start thinking themselves

The social contract would disagree with you... and in general, well society.

Plenty of atheists follow normal moral codes... and plenty of religious people have a hell of a time following their own religions moral codes.

Society in general needs a unified moral code to exist properly.  Otherwise a Social Contract could never really be achieved.

social contract can be achieved by law also

No it can't.  Laws are created as a representation of the Social Contract and draw it's authority from it.

In a world where the is no morality, laws can not exist because actions are completely subjective and nobody really holds a base overwhelming view.

 


but what does morality has to do with religion

 

yeah world soceity is still very much only moral because of GOD higher figure but alot of shit also happens because of clashes

its not that much better

 

and alot of blind faith and less use of critical thinking and soceital manners is what responsible for alot of bad thing in this world too


A lot... at least as far as the West goes.  Western Morality was built around the abrhamic faiths to the point of where there isn't any other morality code based around anything else in western ideals.

Even western "atheist" morality movements that are more humanist are largely basing their morals off of the Abrhamic religions.  Really only that one "morality" tree grew out of the west.  Western Morality and Religion are pretty inseperable at the moment.  One only needs to look at the concept of "Natural Rights".

Compaired to say, Asia which has had multiple moral codes, including ones that are seemingly atheistic, like confusinism.   

Although Confusious himself likely beleived in Chinese Folk Religion.

I do believe the concept of rights came out of a belief in a creator that awarded them.  Such a system also has a creator who has a set of moral standards expected to be upheld also, who will judged.  In such a system, rights and duties get connected and is sustainable.  What has happened in modern society is the like for rights, but not with standards or even a creator who imposes things on people, or so it goes.  So, you have a society, where there isn't a social contract (arguing the youth today have too high standards is an argument against there being a social contract), and anything goes, unless it can be reasoned against.   So, society throws out a consistently agreed to morality and ends up pitting rights against one another, thinking such should work out in the end.  Society then realizes that maybe this isn't the best, but likes the idea of rights, so it gives the Earth and also animals rights, in order to try to argue against destruction of the enviroment and cruelty to animals.



You claim that Abrahamic religions don't follow logic or reasoning.

You say that opinions aren't welcome yet you espouse many.

I have no problem with people discussing controversial issues but I'm going to have to lock this. No arguments.