CreateDebate


Debate Info

Debate Score:29
Arguments:27
Total Votes:29
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 If God does not exist, can anything be morally wrong? (26)

Debate Creator

Cuaroc(8827) pic



If God does not exist, can anything be morally wrong?

Add New Argument
2 points

Morality is an evolutionary adaptation.

Through my experiences and considerations, I have come to the conclusion that morality exists, whether there is a God or not, because evolution is compelling us towards the idea that compassion and benevolence is more effective for surviving and progressing then selfishness and malevolence.

And the only reason evolution would be propelling us towards such an idea is because said idea must, indeed, be correct.

ChuckHades(3197) Disputed
1 point

A question on evolutionary morality.

Imagine a society. This society operates successfully fiscally, militarily, and any other way. This society however has one ritual. All children, for some arbitrary reason, are raped at birth. Using solely the philosophy of evolutionary morality, how can that act be deemed morally wrong?

1 point

because the children are having their free will infringed upon

anachronist(889) Disputed
1 point

That society would not exist in the first place. Our evolutionary morality is determined by the most reasonable response in order to maintain health and structure in a group. Raping babies damages babies. Damaging babies goes against our primary purpose, which is reproduction and nurturing of our own genes, hence why baby harming is irrational and therefore considered immoral by our instincts.

chatturgha(1630) Disputed
1 point

I did not know whether to clarify my statement in a reply to you, or simply dispute you; I am not used to the clarify function. Does it inform the person I reply to, or does it not? Since I am uncertain, I am going to press dispute instead, though I would not exactly consider this reply a true disputation.

Imagine a society. This society operates successfully fiscally, militarily, and any other way. This society however has one ritual. All children, for some arbitrary reason, are raped at birth. Using solely the philosophy of evolutionary morality, how can that act be deemed morally wrong?

It would technically NOT be morally wrong, for said society.

But, as society has been progressing since it's dawn, it has slowly and steadily become more benevolent, graceful, trusting, etc, instead of malevolent, malicious, and selfish.

Which is why I will point out, the society you describe is, in fact, imagined by you. Societies today that behave that way are frowned upon, or even loathed, by most others.

Why is that? There of course, has to, and is, a reason. And historical evidence would answer this by stating that we are progressively becoming more socially benevolent then socially competitive.

If we were not progressing in this fashion, then why are we not still all barbarians? Why do most of us believe rape is wrong? Why do most of us believe in freedom and equality? Why do most of us prefer nice people over harsh and/or mean people?

Why do we dislike Hitler?

Obviously, because we are meant to, and if we are meant to, then that makes clear the idea that benevolence is evolutionarily better for a society to advance then it's opposites. For if we were not mean to be, then we would not be at all. But we are.

ya making someone feel bad and suffer is morally wrong

1 point

What you said.

Morals are subjective. What makes Hitler feel bad might not make Gandhi feel bad, but the opposite might also be true.

It's up to you whether or not you feel guilt about something. Learning about why something hurts other people or why it is wrong or incorrect is important. If being kind doesn't come naturally, there are many books on ethics and doing the right thing. Laziness is a bad excuse for lacking empathy or the ability to care about the feelings of others.

If you do what you feel is right, based on wise decisions, past experience, the ideals of other people, and what your heart tells you, then feeling guilt is a way of knowing what is right or wrong. If you do not feel guilt, it is likely you have a mental disorder, and that is quite a bit different than any sort of philosophical ethics problem like this. Gods have no bearing on morality, or there would be no holy wars, pedophile rapist priests, people who use religion to make money and other corrupted ideas that spurt forth from believers.

Whether or not a god exists, people can still hurt people or help people. Believing in a god does not make you a good person. It makes you a believer in a god.

Being a good person is far more complex than that.

No, because nothing is intrinsically wrong. When fucking Charles Manson or whoever killed a bunch of people, it was sickening and disgusting and blah blah blah. But there was no universal code that was violated.

1 point

Sort of "at the level of the universe" there is no right or wrong. Nothing matters.

But, we exist and do survive. To us, what opposes or obstructs our survival is, basically, wrong. We cannot survive without science and technology - think of the future and the many possible extinctions.

1 point

We cannot survive without science and technology

?

nummi(1432) Disputed
1 point

Think of the future and the many possible extinctions. You think we could overcome the expansion of our sun to a red giant, if we were to survive that long? If we could get that far we would need to find a new home elsewhere, in another solar system, or as nomads of the galaxy. The only way to achieve that is through science and technology.

Of course there can be some form of inherent morality in existence, which could cover anything. The hard part is figuring what the fuck it says.