Re: Hello there, I'm an atheist
Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2015 9:51 am
Apos wrote:
You have not established much of a basis for determining the "oughts". Let us say that I have borrowed $10,000 from a very wealthy man, a billionaire. To secure the loan I have given him the title to my car to hold. The transaction is informal, there is no paperwork. Then one day the man, who is elderly and not as sharp mentally as he once was, sends me a letter thanking me for paying off the loan and included is my car title. I have yet to pay him anything. This gentleman will never miss the $10,000 nor will he be affected negatively in any way. I can surely use the money, as I am poor. How would you, as an atheist, establish what I ought to do? On what basis?
Tell me why my wife and I should, as we have done and continue to do, give money to assist the poor? For example, World Vision helps the poor in far away lands and we will never know who we have helped nor will they know us. There would seem to be no communal benefit in our helping them. I would think an atheist could reason that the greatest good in promoting the human condition would be to let those who are starving die. After all, isn't the world overpopulated with limited resources? And if the poor can raise themselves up they will want to consume even more limited goods and accelerate global warming, harming the rest of us.
I would say it is a no-brainer that punishment discourages immoral behavior.
I agree with your "take" on the moral person doing the right thing. I'm pleased to see that a bit of your Christian upbringing has stuck with you. The person ought to do what is right because it is right.In order for this case to make sense as a imputation of atheist ethics, there needs to be a demonstration that the threat of punishment discourages immoral behavior. However, how can one claim to be a moral actor, if they do the 'right thing' because they fear punishment, as opposed to doing the right thing, because it is the right thing. I believe the second person is the truly moral person.
You have not established much of a basis for determining the "oughts". Let us say that I have borrowed $10,000 from a very wealthy man, a billionaire. To secure the loan I have given him the title to my car to hold. The transaction is informal, there is no paperwork. Then one day the man, who is elderly and not as sharp mentally as he once was, sends me a letter thanking me for paying off the loan and included is my car title. I have yet to pay him anything. This gentleman will never miss the $10,000 nor will he be affected negatively in any way. I can surely use the money, as I am poor. How would you, as an atheist, establish what I ought to do? On what basis?
Tell me why my wife and I should, as we have done and continue to do, give money to assist the poor? For example, World Vision helps the poor in far away lands and we will never know who we have helped nor will they know us. There would seem to be no communal benefit in our helping them. I would think an atheist could reason that the greatest good in promoting the human condition would be to let those who are starving die. After all, isn't the world overpopulated with limited resources? And if the poor can raise themselves up they will want to consume even more limited goods and accelerate global warming, harming the rest of us.
I would say it is a no-brainer that punishment discourages immoral behavior.