Bekijk volle/desktop versie : zonder religie geen moraal en geen ethiek



Pagina's : [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36

04-11-2010, 12:58
Ah, how refreshing it is to hear someone admit, even if only implicitly, that modern ethics came from religious morality. Of course, I am referring to Sam Arnold’s recent response to Michael Patrick’s article. Mr. Arnold states that religion is like an evolutionary trait we at one time needed but has become obsolete in view of the proliferation of ethics. Basically put – because this world is so ethical, we no longer need religion.

Let me paint you a picture. We all have seen the new Science and Engineering Complex being built near the Ferg. Such construction requires planning, hard work, design and problem solving. They have to lay the foundation, the groundwork. Then they frame the building. They install drywall, and in the end you have a building. And you will never, ever need those contractors again.

At least this is what Mr. Arnold says. When there is a hole in the ethical wall, it needs no repairing. When lights won’t work from a short in the moral wiring, it needs no fixing. The fact of the matter is that although some would say you can be ethical without being religious, you cannot be ethical without religion.

Religion is the basis of ethics. There is no denying this. Even Christopher Hitchens acknowledges that atheism without religion has no morals, no ethics, and would lead to an evil tyrannical world (I heard this personally). If we reject religion, eventually we will question why we began doing things in the first place. I am not supposed to just steal money because why? Because of ethics? Social Contract? No. Because at some point people believed in answering for your actions even beyond life. Ethics may govern society, but religion governs ethics and is very necessary.
http://www.cw.ua.edu/2010/11/04/religious-beliefs-necessary-for-modern-atheism/

04-11-2010, 13:03



Citaat door Marouan_22:
Ah, how refreshing it is to hear someone admit, even if only implicitly, that modern ethics came from religious morality. Of course, I am referring to Sam Arnold’s recent response to Michael Patrick’s article. Mr. Arnold states that religion is like an evolutionary trait we at one time needed but has become obsolete in view of the proliferation of ethics. Basically put – because this world is so ethical, we no longer need religion.

Let me paint you a picture. We all have seen the new Science and Engineering Complex being built near the Ferg. Such construction requires planning, hard work, design and problem solving. They have to lay the foundation, the groundwork. Then they frame the building. They install drywall, and in the end you have a building. And you will never, ever need those contractors again.

At least this is what Mr. Arnold says. When there is a hole in the ethical wall, it needs no repairing. When lights won’t work from a short in the moral wiring, it needs no fixing. The fact of the matter is that although some would say you can be ethical without being religious, you cannot be ethical without religion.

Religion is the basis of ethics. There is no denying this. Even Christopher Hitchens acknowledges that atheism without religion has no morals, no ethics, and would lead to an evil tyrannical world (I heard this personally). If we reject religion, eventually we will question why we began doing things in the first place. I am not supposed to just steal money because why? Because of ethics? Social Contract? No. Because at some point people believed in answering for your actions even beyond life. Ethics may govern society, but religion governs ethics and is very necessary.
http://www.cw.ua.edu/2010/11/04/religious-beliefs-necessary-for-modern-atheism/



Citaat door Mar2_22:

Onzin.
Ik had het niet beter kunnen zeggen.

04-11-2010, 13:08

Citaat door Marouan_22:
Ah, how refreshing it is to hear someone admit, even if only implicitly, that modern ethics came from religious morality. Of course, I am referring to Sam Arnold’s recent response to Michael Patrick’s article. Mr. Arnold states that religion is like an evolutionary trait we at one time needed but has become obsolete in view of the proliferation of ethics. Basically put – because this world is so ethical, we no longer need religion.

Let me paint you a picture. We all have seen the new Science and Engineering Complex being built near the Ferg. Such construction requires planning, hard work, design and problem solving. They have to lay the foundation, the groundwork. Then they frame the building. They install drywall, and in the end you have a building. And you will never, ever need those contractors again.

At least this is what Mr. Arnold says. When there is a hole in the ethical wall, it needs no repairing. When lights won’t work from a short in the moral wiring, it needs no fixing. The fact of the matter is that although some would say you can be ethical without being religious, you cannot be ethical without religion.

Religion is the basis of ethics. There is no denying this. Even Christopher Hitchens acknowledges that atheism without religion has no morals, no ethics, and would lead to an evil tyrannical world (I heard this personally). If we reject religion, eventually we will question why we began doing things in the first place. I am not supposed to just steal money because why? Because of ethics? Social Contract? No. Because at some point people believed in answering for your actions even beyond life. Ethics may govern society, but religion governs ethics and is very necessary.
http://www.cw.ua.edu/2010/11/04/religious-beliefs-necessary-for-modern-atheism/




Wij van wc eend, adviseren ..

04-11-2010, 13:14

Citaat:
Even Christopher Hitchens acknowledges that atheism without religion has no morals, no ethics, and would lead to an evil tyrannical world
Toch wel één van de bekendste atheïsten die dit zegt.

hoe kan het ook anders. Zonder God kun je geen moraal hebben en kun je ook niet ethisch handelen.

04-11-2010, 13:15



Citaat door Marouan_22:
Ah, how refreshing it is to hear someone admit, even if only implicitly, that modern ethics came from religious morality. Of course, I am referring to Sam Arnold’s recent response to Michael Patrick’s article. Mr. Arnold states that religion is like an evolutionary trait we at one time needed but has become obsolete in view of the proliferation of ethics. Basically put – because this world is so ethical, we no longer need religion.

Let me paint you a picture. We all have seen the new Science and Engineering Complex being built near the Ferg. Such construction requires planning, hard work, design and problem solving. They have to lay the foundation, the groundwork. Then they frame the building. They install drywall, and in the end you have a building. And you will never, ever need those contractors again.

At least this is what Mr. Arnold says. When there is a hole in the ethical wall, it needs no repairing. When lights won’t work from a short in the moral wiring, it needs no fixing. The fact of the matter is that although some would say you can be ethical without being religious, you cannot be ethical without religion.

Religion is the basis of ethics. There is no denying this. Even Christopher Hitchens acknowledges that atheism without religion has no morals, no ethics, and would lead to an evil tyrannical world (I heard this personally). If we reject religion, eventually we will question why we began doing things in the first place. I am not supposed to just steal money because why? Because of ethics? Social Contract? No. Because at some point people believed in answering for your actions even beyond life. Ethics may govern society, but religion governs ethics and is very necessary.
http://www.cw.ua.edu/2010/11/04/religious-beliefs-necessary-for-modern-atheism/


Ook ik gebruik altijd het beste merk dat er is. Wat niet deugt gooi ik weg.


In feite is dit alles dan ook geen nieuwswaarde.

04-11-2010, 13:16
Dawkins heeft het voorlopig nog te druk met het aanklagen van zijn beste atheïstische vriendje:
http://life.nationalpost.com/2010/10/26/oh-my-god-atheist-richard-dawkins-suing-fellow-non-believer/

ook dit is weer een bewijs dat atheïsten geen moraal hebben, twee beste vrienden die elkaar niet eens kunnen vertrouwen.

04-11-2010, 13:17

Citaat door Marouan_22:
Zonder God kun je geen moraal hebben en kun je ook niet ethisch handelen.


Want?



Nu zal hier wel geen reactie op komen want vragen beantwoorden & nadenken over een onderwerp is wat lastig voor M22.

04-11-2010, 13:19

Citaat door Marouan_22:
Toch wel één van de bekendste atheïsten die dit zegt.

hoe kan het ook anders. Zonder God kun je geen moraal hebben en kun je ook niet ethisch handelen.

Ik geloof er niks van dat Hitchens dat gezegd heeft.

Maar ook al, alsof het daarom waar zou zijn.

Als je kijkt naar de bezetting van de gevangenissen zijn atheisten ondervertegenwoordigd en gelovigen oververtegenwoordigd.

Do the math!

04-11-2010, 13:20
Er is in de praktijk geen enkel bewijs dat een gelovige een moreel hogere standaard heeft dan een niet-gelovige. Complete onzin dus.

04-11-2010, 13:21

Citaat door Marouan_22:
Toch wel één van de bekendste atheïsten die dit zegt.

hoe kan het ook anders. Zonder God kun je geen moraal hebben en kun je ook niet ethisch handelen.



Ik kan nergens terug vinden dat Hitchens dat gezegd heeft.

Wel zegt hij het volgende over religie ..

"Religie is misdadig omdat ze..."

"doodt, zoals in Belfast, Beiroet, Bombay, Belgrado, Bethlehem en Bagdad (uit God Is Not Great)."
"een archaïsch en totalitair wereldbeeld progageert.
"irrationeel is en mensen compleet gekke zaken verbiedt, zoals het eten van varkensvlees (uit God Is Not Great)."
"condooms en polio-inentingen verbiedt en zo tienduizenden doden per jaar maakt (uit God Is Not Great)."
"tot kindermishandeling leidt (uit God Is Not Great)."
"leugens vertelt over de menselijke afkomst en plaats op aarde (uit God Is Not Great)."
"tot vrouwendiscriminatie en -verminking leidt."
"onze seksuele vrijheid fnuikt (uit God Is Not Great)."
"precies het tegengestelde voortbrengt van wat ze belooft: verdriet, angst en onderwerping in plaats van geluk, openheid en zelfstandigheid (uit God Is Not Great)."

04-11-2010, 13:22

Citaat door amused:
Er is in de praktijk geen enkel bewijs dat een gelovige een moreel hogere standaard heeft dan een niet-gelovige. Complete onzin dus.

Kijk naar de gevangenissen en er is wel een argument te maken dat ongelovigen een hogere moraal hebben dan gelovigen.

04-11-2010, 13:36
Een morele wet maakt in theorie expliciet wat in feite al impliciet aanwezig is. Het feit creëert de regel; het is niet de regel die het feit creëert.
De moraal bestond dus in feite al lang voordat ze gedefinieerd werd, of beschreven.

Het niet erkennen van deze simpele waarheid is de belangrijkste oorzaak van de onzin die zoveel verkondigers van ethiek opdienen, en ook voor de domme aanvallen op de ethiek door diegenen die zich gerechtigd voelen morele waarden in hun geheel af te wijzen omdat ze niet tevreden zijn over de bestaande standaard van morele waarden.

04-11-2010, 13:36



Citaat door Ygdrasil:
Ik geloof er niks van dat Hitchens dat gezegd heeft.
Een bron wordt dan ook niet gegeven.

04-11-2010, 13:39
Leugenachtig artikel met hoog zwakzinnigheidsgehalte.

04-11-2010, 13:44
Wie maakt zich nou druk om een mening van een tweedejaars student computer engineering?

Pagina's : [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36