Morality Without God

And welcome her to her first debate. " Thanks, it's my pleasure; And now, onto my argument… "You forget that there may not even be a God at all. If this is the case than our only foundation for our morals would be ourselves and society anyway, with no consequence on whether we believe in him or not. I also do not think it is a shaky foundation, for it is based solely on reason. If there's any shaky foundation here it's that we get our morals from God, for this is founded on faith. Morality should not be a matter to be taken on faith. " The main point here is not whether there is God or not, the main point is whether we believe in Him or not. So if we believe in Him, We are in a triangular loop where there is Us, society and the God. So that is not a shaky foundation, for we believe in him, and so the three determinants would be always there… On the other hand if we do not believe in him, there is just us and the society. The point I was making was that we are constantly changing. Our perception may change from today to tomorrow, our close society, i. e our group of friends may change too, they would have different ideologies. So, that, is what I think would be a shaky foundation, because both the determinants –society and us too would change. "Since my opponent has conceded that it is a claim not based on logic, it has no practical application in this debate. Our moral systems must be founded on reason. " (on my reference that there is no scientific proof for the basic nature of Karma, but still it is what many times prompt us to follow the right path) Our moral systems must be founded on reason, and I agree to that. Let us take an example, let us say that I believe that if I would steal anything from anyone, the deed will bring misfortune for me in future. So, for not stealing, that is a reason enough for me. Because if I really, Really STRONGLY want the thing, just the fact that it is wrong to steal, would not stop me. I might rationalize it out, saying that it is just one time, or that I really need it, or the person wouldn't notice… the excuses are endless. But my belief that stealing would harm my future would stop me. Because now the action would affect me. Adversely. "Indeed mankind is selfish. You have not shown how this a bad thing though. " I have actually stated that being a selfish being, "if he thinks he can get away with something, there is very little to hold him back, and only a man of infinite patience and calmness can actually follow his moral principles just because it is wrong to do so. " As I explained, with example in the previous paragraph. "I argue that it is not. I feel my own existence, it is only rational to pursue my own pleasure. " That is what is the first step to a vicious cycle. Of course it is rational to pursue your own pleasure, but this can give a ‘reason' to many crimes. This is where faith and the relation between God and morality come into play. Here is what I propose. We live our lives. We have work to do, and we are, generally speaking- caught in the duties and aspirations and the rat race and whatnot of life. In this race, sometimes, or rather many a times, we would be tempted to nudge across the line of morals, of doing wrong things, for revenge, out of jealousy, etc, etc. This is natural and I think we both agree on this. Now, our difference mainly arise on choosing the system to overrule or barricade this temptation. So, we are tempted to cross the line. If we were to make our own rules, ‘for we are highly evolved species and rational beings', we can justify revenge. (‘A person did wrong to me, so it is fair for me to do wrong to him'), pride (‘I did good, I am better than most, it's the truth, I can't do anything about that'), envy , many many sins. Because we are our own masters, we make our own rules, so we can tweak them a little. And that's what most of the time bring us down. But when we are accepting the rules given by the God, we know that revenge, pride and envy, they all are the deadly sins. And when we know this, and when's we haven't rationalized them out, we actually follow the morals. Because we know it's wrong. We accept it. The point I'm trying to make is that we NEED something stable in our lives; we need something that does not change. We need to have a basis or something that gives us the knowledge about what wrong and right is. Maybe some people believe that they can make their own rules, and that they can actually follow them, but fighting with yourself is most of the times much, much easier. This isn't pessimistic; it's just the truth, or realistic view of the problem.