Trivia Atheists: if you don't believe in God, what prevents you from committing murder?

[Kaplok Kaplok]

Ung gantong mindset ung mga naniniwala na ang pagiging believer nila eh makes them better than others…

Who says na ang paniniwala = better?
I mean if they are in the same category as the so-called demonyo, that is hinting to something.. hahaha

 

[plhbg1]

Who says na ang paniniwala = better?

is it because they have the answers while science don't?

 

[Kaplok Kaplok]

is it because they have the answers while science don't?

One thing I can say, they are very certain with their answers. But:

"Certainty is not an indication of truth"
-Joseph Goldstein

In science, certainty ideally is thrown out the window to get the best results for finding truth.

 

[jayendecastro]

Who says na ang paniniwala = better?
I mean if they are in the same category as the so-called demonyo, that is hinting to something.. hahaha

better morally kasi demonyo represents kasamaan..so iniimply na non believers are worst that demons..mas masama kumbaga... putting them "lower" than those evil demons...

 

[plhbg1]

better morally kasi demonyo represents kasamaan..so iniimply na non believers are worst that demons..mas masama kumbaga... putting them "lower" than those evil demons...

di pa nga sila nakaka sure if "it is good because the God wills it or the God wills it because it is good" and yet they think their God's morality is the standard, may pa-claim pa na "objective" daw hehe ay nako mga christians talaga kung anu-anu kini-claim at ini-impose pa sa unbelievers

 

[Kaplok Kaplok]

better morally kasi demonyo represents kasamaan..so iniimply na non believers are worst that demons..mas masama kumbaga... putting them "lower" than those evil demons...

I guess? Pero both sa logical ethics at sa bible ethics, there is no such heirarchy. It is just fallciously constructed by a believer, perhaps to elevate themself somehow. Pero it does not make sense.

I wonder kung saan nila ilalagay si Dalai Lama. Below or above the devil? Below or above a random christian?

 

[PHC_Komorebi]

hehe mahirap talaga sagutin kasi alin man diyan sa dalawa ay meron problem, which leaves to another option in which god should not exist so we don't have problems like that

ikaw boss tatanungin kita: is it good and just to put atis pipz in hell because God wills it? or God wills it because it is good and just

Niligalig kana ata sa pagiging atheist mo pre ha hahahha

 

[jayendecastro]

I guess? Pero both sa logical ethics at sa bible ethics, there is no such heirarchy. It is just fallciously constructed by a believer, perhaps to elevate themself somehow. Pero it does not make sense.

I wonder kung saan nila ilalagay si Dalai Lama. Below or above the devil? Below or above a random christian?

Thats how some theist sees it. Nababaliwala minsan ung essence ng deeds dahil sa non belief ng isang individual…

 

[plhbg1]

Niligalig kana ata sa pagiging atheist mo pre ha hahahha

so anu ba yung sagot boss: is it good because God wills it? or God wills it because it is good hehe

 

[bndnl]

Being Atheist doesn't equate being bad. di naman porket atiz ka, eh masama ka na. If epitome pala ng pagiging mabuting tao ang pagiging religious, ba't andami pa ring masasamang ugali/criminal na religious person? at bakit may mabubuti rin na atheist?

ang interesting din ng éùthyphro dilemma na diniscuss ni plhbg1, parang bang construct din kasi yung religion na ni-create ng mga tao noon so that people will have something to believe in or to preserve theso called goodness. And it also makes you question what makes good good and what makes bad bad, like, who decides which is which haha.

To answer the questionn. morality nga. ewan idk hwo do you explain it? innate?

quoting plhbg1 again "4. If there are moral standards independent of God, then morality would retain its authority even if God did not exist."

 

[N E G A N]

It doesn't really matter. Wether you believe or not. Papay ka parin ng tao kung gusto mo , yun ngalang GG ka sa bilanggoan

 

[jayendecastro]

Being Atheist doesn't equate being bad. If epitome pala ng pagiging mabuting tao pag religious ka, ba't andami pa ring masasamang ugali na religious person?

Yup.. exactly my point

 

[plhbg1]

Being Atheist doesn't equate being bad. If epitome pala ng pagiging mabuting tao pag religious ka, ba't andami pa ring masasamang ugali na religious person?

sabi nung isang christian dito boss, mga fake christians daw tawag sa kanila and that makes their God's morality still on top of everything

It doesn't really matter. Wether you believe or not. Papay ka parin ng tao kung gusto mo , yun ngalang GG ka sa bilanggoan

personally i'm not killing because i have no reason for doing it, reasons nagpapa galaw sakin eh and that would mean papatay pa din ako if that reason arrives hehe

 

[Kaplok Kaplok]

Being Atheist doesn't equate being bad. di naman porket atiz ka, eh masama ka na. If epitome pala ng pagiging mabuting tao ang pagiging religious, ba't andami pa ring masasamang ugali/criminal na religious person? at bakit may mabubuti rin na atheist?

ang interesting din ng éùthyphro dilemma na diniscuss ni plhbg1, parang bang construct din kasi yung religion na ni-create ng mga tao noon so that people will have something to believe in or to preserve theso called goodness. And it also makes you question what makes good good and what makes bad bad, like, who decides which is which haha.

To answer the questionn. morality nga. ewan idk hwo do you explain it? innate?

quoting plhbg1 again "4. If there are moral standards independent of God, then morality would retain its authority even if God did not exist."

When we say innate... it also makes it weird diba.

Tingin ko ang pagkakamali natin when thinking about this kaya tayo napupunta sa wierd conclusion is because we think there is such thing as "objective morality". Both theist and atheist do this.

If you think about morality really honestly and away from the sway of emotions, there is really no such thing objective as morality. Even if we say there is a God, who set rules and stuff, there is no logical way to prove what this god say is "good".

So morality does not need to be innate, nor we need a God to explain it, because it can only be subjective in the first place. It cannot be defined the way we define it outside the human experience.

 

[i-chi-go]

Hindi ako atheist, i think may konsensya lang talaga sila kaya ganon

 

[bndnl]

When we say innate... it also makes it weird diba.

Tingin ko ang pagkakamali natin when thinking about this kaya tayo napupunta sa wierd conclusion is because we think there is such thing as "objective morality".

If you think about morality really honestly and away from the sway of emotions, there is really no such thing objective as morality. Even if we say there is a God, who set rules and stuff, there is no logical way to prove what this god say is "good".

So morality does not need to be innate, nor we need a God to explain it, because it can only be subjective in the first place. It cannot be defined the way we define it outside the human experience.

agreed, very subjective nga ng morality and could be influenced depending on the environment.

For example, sa christianity, monogamy lang, pero sa islam (???) polyamory and could be perceived as immoral by external parties while accepted by that specific group. couldnt be objectively defined nga and in the end, it is still the person who believes decides wether it is moral or not.

 

[Kaplok Kaplok]

agreed, very subjective nga ng morality and could be influenced depending on the environment.

For example, sa christianity, monogamy lang, pero sa islam (???) polyamory and could be perceived as immoral by external parties while accepted by that specific group. couldnt be objectively defined nga and in the end, it is still the person who believes decides wether it is moral or not.

Yan nga sa example mo two different Gods kaya mahirap tlga i-weigh.

Pero say for example, you have not encountered any religion in your life. Then you meet 2 entities. A real, God and Satan. Is there a logical reason to pick what God is saying as good vs what Satan says? Any decision that you end up saying God is the good one will have to be influenced by subjective beliefs on what "God" and "Satan" means. Maybe you might base it on their appearance, which is also subjective. Pag nadiscover mo nga that one was the performer of a great genocide, and the other convinced a woman to eat the fruit of knowledge, you might even have a reverse conclusion, but is still subjective. We don't know that "objectively" and we can't prove it.

 

[jayendecastro]

When we say innate... it also makes it weird diba.

Tingin ko ang pagkakamali natin when thinking about this kaya tayo napupunta sa wierd conclusion is because we think there is such thing as "objective morality". Both theist and atheist do this.

If you think about morality really honestly and away from the sway of emotions, there is really no such thing objective as morality. Even if we say there is a God, who set rules and stuff, there is no logical way to prove what this god say is "good".

So morality does not need to be innate, nor we need a God to explain it, because it can only be subjective in the first place. It cannot be defined the way we define it outside the human experience.

Agree with u here.. most atheist i know will say na subjective ang morality.. especially sa individual level.. ung individual judgments natin if that aligns with other people around us,,other communities i think nagiging objective na sya in the sense na its true for everyone na… for that community at least..

Yan nga sa example mo two different Gods kaya mahirap tlga i-weigh.

Pero say for example, you have not encountered any religion in your life. Then you meet 2 entities. A real, God and Satan. Is there a logical reason to pick what God is saying as good vs what Satan says? Any decision that you end up saying God is the good one will have to be influenced by subjective beliefs on what "God" and "Satan" means. Maybe you might base it on their appearance, which is also subjective. Pag nadiscover mo nga that one was the performer of a great genocide, and the other convinced a woman to eat the fruit of knowledge, you might even have a reverse conclusion, but is still subjective. We don't know that "objectively" and we can't prove it.

This is giving me the “Is satan really the bad guy in genesis?” vibe… haha

 

[Kaplok Kaplok]

Agree with u here.. most atheist i know will say na subjective ang morality.. especially sa individual level.. ung individual judgments natin if that aligns with other people around us,,other communities i think nagiging objective na sya in the sense na its true for everyone na… for that community at least..

Pero kahit ganyang accepted ng majority, it just "seems objective". Simply because you can rest assured that the next person will have the same opinion on the morality. Pero technically, subjective padin yan. Upon our definition of good, which really largely hinges on how we subjectively want or not want to be treated by others, and existing pressumptions on what constitute "good" based on historical interpretation of events still wrapped within what consequences we subjectively prefer.

This is giving me the “Is satan really the bad guy in genesis?” vibe… haha

Wala sa intention ko sabihin yan. Dinedemonstrate ko lang na there is nothing objecrive about how we pick between God and Satan. Everything is still subjective pressumption even if God exists. Pero it is a valid question tlga.

 

[bndnl]

Agree with u here.. most atheist i know will say na subjective ang morality.. especially sa individual level.. ung individual judgments natin if that aligns with other people around us,,other communities i think nagiging objective na sya in the sense na its true for everyone na… for that community at least..


This is giving me the “Is satan really the bad guy in genesis?” vibe… haha

Kahit anong paniniwala naman parang may assigned roles na ganyan, more like yin yang, parang they co exist. Naalala ko yung "Deviance" na term sa Philo subject nung senior high.
If aapply rito, parang may socially accepted lang na mga bagay, and as we push boundaries, dun madidiscover the things that are socially unacceptable. Dun sa scenario na 2 entities na walang pag kakakilanlan which of em are good or bad, parang tao na lang nag aassociate which actions will be represented by who HAHAHAHAHA

from theology, napunta na tayo s sociology. Pero diba, observable, if blank slate pa sa beliefs and religions, it'll root talaga sa pag sangayon ng bawat myembro ng grupo na kinabibilangan kung ano ba yung mga bagay acceptable or hindi, then as that society grows, the set norms will be their foundation of the morals.