Subject:
|
Re: Worthlessness
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 16 Sep 2004 18:49:27 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1570 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
> Not at all the same. I still don't have a satisfactory answer from atheists
> to the question "why do good?" (from a {personal} standpoint rather than some
> overall societal efficiency explanation)
Let me ask you this:
If tomorrow you found out for 100% certain that God didn't exist, would you
still do good things? Or would you breathe a sigh of releif and start raping
babies?
I think we do good because we want to. Now, you may think that that "want" is
generated by God, but it just so happens that we atheists believe it comes from
ourselves. Where it comes from is honestly irrelevant-- we DO want to do good.
The explanation for why is theoretical, and neither you nor us can prove where
it comes from; all we can do is make guesses.
Personally, I think it comes from social understanding:
1) We have desires. We tend to evaluate those desires as being "good".
2) We recognize that other people are other versions of ourselves-- that they're
somehow people just like we're people.
3) We make the connection that these other people have desires, similar to our
own desires.
4) We start to place a value of "good" on other people's desires, the same as
our own.
But it's not always milk & cookies:
People also have a natural tendancy for control & predictability. Hence, we like
people that are similar to us because we can predict them, and our world becomes
a little bit 'safer'. Oftentimes, when someone is difficult to predict (because
they're different from us and have different desires), we don't like that, and
hence place less value on their desires, or even a value of "bad" in extremes.
Of course sometimes instead of wanting that 'safer' world via exclusion of
something different, we want to learn about people that are different so we CAN
predict them, etc, which often (when successful) leads to more tolerance and
avoiding valuating others' desires as "bad".
Now, as Chis pointed out, that's evolution at work. Why we decide to associate
other people's desires as "good" isn't clear. How it ever got in our genes we
may never know. But you see it in lots of places in nature, particularly with
families of animals. That system of wanting good for others produces societal
bonds, which help us work together to avoid predators, work together to feed
each other, and in general ensure that we've got other people who'll help us out
if we need it.
As it turns out, that system works really well! And beings within that structure
tend to thrive and survive. Hence, they live on for generations. Who knows,
early mammals may have been more independant and died out really quickly because
they couldn't rely on the societal bonds. Natural selection at work.
So is all the above correct? I dunno. I have no way of proving it, but it makes
sense to me, so I think it's right. You obviously don't believe it, and hence
have your own theory as to why we do good. And likewise, you can't prove it.
Each theory has logical merit, each one unprovable, unless we someday figure out
where the "want-to-do-good" gene is, and do some tests. In that event, the
theory that it comes from genes is scientifically falsifiable, and hence might
someday be supported or disproven, but I don't think we ever have much hope of
testing the "comes-from-God" theory, unless God decides to pop on down and show
us.
DaveE
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Worthlessness
|
| (...) You should, or else Dave! is correct. (...) You should, or else Dave! is correct. (...) Not at all the same. I still don't have a satisfactory answer from atheists to the question "why do good?" (from a personal standpoint rather than some (...) (20 years ago, 16-Sep-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
44 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
