Re: The danger of misplaced dogmatism: for my fellow Christians,

John Harshman wrote:

VBM wrote:

[snipped for housekeeping]


I have seen enough on both sides to say that neither can claim the

moral

high ground. This, of course, is more of a condemnation of the
fundamentalist than the atheist, given their claims.

That seems a bit condescending and dismissive too. (And in fact I find
the statements of most religionists regarding atheism to be highly
dismissive and condescending.) Who says that an atheist wouldn't want
to claim the moral high ground? In fact I do, and could attempt to
defend the claim that atheism is a moral choice superior to religion,
if you

cared.


This is of course entirely off-topic for TO.


I see what you mean, but you do not claim to have some special source of
moral edification and uplifting, like the Holy Spirit, which is meant to
help us rise above our basic selfish natures and move toward "loving one
another" in ways that we can't do on our own. If there are two equally

rude

individuals, even if both are equally desiring to be moral, it is still

the

one who is claiming supernatural assistance that has set a higher bar

for

himself.

I would say that in that case the extra condemnation is due not for
failing to live up to a moral code, but for claiming special status for
that moral code in the first place.


Hmm, I wouldn't really call it a special "status" since that implies that
we are somehow part of a special "super-club" that is automatically more
moral.

And that is in fact what many Christians do claim. I will accept that
you are not one of them.

Would that it were that easy. What I, as a Christian, believe is that
we have access to a "helper" who can give us a boost in that regard, and
only
if we avail ourselves of it. It is something free to all, so there is
nothing exclusive about it, or allow us any self-congratulation.

I doubt the existence of this helper, and there seems little evidence
for one; if it existed, wouldn't it have the effect of making
Christians, on average, more moral than non-Christians?

Are you talking Christian believers vs. non-Christian believers or vs.
atheists? Your logic doesn't necessarily follow. We have several
possibilities here. One is that we have two groups of people, one which is
inclined to faith and one which is not, and the argument could be that the
group which is inclined to faith will be more moral if they are Christian
than if they are TVan (i.e. have no moral training other than what they
glean from the culture at large). The morality of the group which is not
inclined to faith might be unrelated to religion, as this group, lacking
faith, would have to find a different rationale for their morality. Notice
that I am assuming all of the people will adopt some morality (or invent
some basis to justify their inborn and acquired morality). It is also
possible that those who are inclined to faith would behave more morally by
believing in any of a number of different religions than by being TVan. As
you have probably guessed, this scenario reflects my own beliefs on the
matter.

But there are clearly other possibilities. One, of course, is that Christian
believers are less moral than non-Christian believers. One is your
proposition that Christian believers are more moral than non-Christian
believers, but you don't see it because you are a non-believer and are
still moral.


On the
contrary, I believe that we are then held to a higher standard of care,
and one which we rarely meet.

What makes you think you're held to a higher standard?

Perhaps more importantly for all of us, it appears that we have two sets of
ideals of what is good: what is good for the individual,and what is good
for the community. These ideals often conflict. It appears likely that
current culture (most especially advertising) places too much emphasis on
what is good for the individual vs. what is good for the community.
Religion has an important role in emphasizing the good of the community
vs.the good of the individual. While it is certainly possible to
overemphasize the good of the community, I'm not sure this is a huge
current threat.

--
Yours, Bill Morse

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Faith and Skepticism
    ... > We know that reason reaches valid conclusions by simple testing. ... > processes like religious faith, the result does NOT depend on who is ... reductionist atheism, your brain consists of nothing more than randomly ... sloshing of dead chemicals," says the Christian. ...
    (soc.religion.christian)
  • Re: The danger of misplaced dogmatism: for my fellow Christians,
    ... defend the claim that atheism is a moral choice superior to religion, ... Are you talking Christian believers vs. non-Christian believers or vs. ... inclined to faith might be unrelated to religion, as this group, lacking ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Funny...
    ... an element of faith in religion, just as there is in atheism, in the ... He'd lost faith in the bed. ... A christian isn't a christian because they were compelled ... God exists, or the devil for that matter. ...
    (talk.atheism)
  • Re: Funny...
    ... an element of faith in religion, just as there is in atheism, in the ... proven - but atheism does not. ... that the only thing there is was the visible universe. ... become a Christian by some intellectual argument that this was not the ...
    (talk.atheism)
  • Re: Funny...
    ... an element of faith in religion, just as there is in atheism, in the ... proven - but atheism does not. ... predictable dialogue that Kelley.Bellard was complaining about in the ... Christian doublethinker: "God don't love a dirty atheist." ...
    (talk.atheism)