Would any theists here behave less morally if "there was no God"?

[AntiKarateKid]

Selam aleykum
How about being altruistic for the sake of altruism. Why do you need a reason? Why can't you just accept that people choose to be altruistic because they consider it the right thing to do? I remember even back when I was an atheist that I did acts of altruism even when I thought there was absolutely no benefit in it for me. Not all people act only on egoistic motives. For some people altruism in itself can be the motive. Especially people with ASD have a high tendency towards this. And if you can't understand people acting altruistic only for the sake of of it, well no offence, but then I pity you.

On another note, I could just as well reflect the argument, why would people act selfish? Of course you can say, because it benefits them, and then I could say, well that is what selfish means, merely stating the characteristics of selfish acts doesn't explain why people do them. Catch my drift?

There is no such thing as altruism. There is always something in it for you. Whether it be even the satisfaction of considering yourself altruistic. It doesn't exist. I am speaking theoretically and if you can't tolerate a person questioning the true meaning behind actions without trying to derive opinions about them as a person, then I pity you, brother. Everything has a reason even if you don't consciously acknowledge it.

As for your reflection, I am sure you could make your own thread about that if you wish. The reactions I have recieved from the theists here indicate that to one degree or another, they would allow themselves to decline morally (though obviously not to the extent of murdering their neighbors). If they say that their upringing or culture would prevent them from declining, then it has to be asked, why obey those things anyways? I certainly catch your drift and if you would like you can make a thread on it or PM me and I'm happy to talk while I procrastinate here.

I have to say, I enjoyed reading your posts on this board but am disappointed by your frankly nonsense claim about me and your "pity" statement.

 

[جوري]

are there any atheist grave yards? to say there are no atheists in prison is ludicrous.. people who commit heinous crimes aren't exactly God conscious.. they don't put atheist on their certificates when off to prison any more than atheists request to be buried in atheist grave yards, I don't believe any exist..of course I could be wrong...

 

[AntiKarateKid]

To those here who believe that religion is the sole source of ethics and good behaviour, I ask you why are atheists under-represented and not over-represented in prison for theft, murder, etc? The prisons should be overflowing with atheists if your claim was true and yet the reverse is actually the case (though its not strong enough in the other direction to lead me to make any claim that atheists are morally superior).

Sister Skye's post brought my attention to this one that I overlooked.

Pygo, your statement would carry weight if there were an equal number of atheists and theists. Then if more theists went to jail, you may of had a point. Moreover, you have to consider the mentality of people in jail. They often look for a way out, to uplift themselves and start over and thats why many start converting to different religions or finding a new one.

Heres something I found.

According to the DOJ Bureau of Justice Statistics (National Census of the Jail Population 12/31/95), while 72% affirmed affiliation with religious institutions (determined through answers to the question on "Religious Background" on the Penal entrance form) only 54% of Federal and State Prisoners actually consider themselves religious, and 33% can be confirmed to be practicing their religion. This is demonstrated by attendance records at religious services, which averaged anywhere between 30% and 40%, depending upon the time of year and the institution in question (and who was preaching).

Theres more but... its late here.

 

[Pygoscelis]

I said under-represented, which accounts for the smaller number in the general population. I also made no claim that there are no atheists in prison. Just to clear up some straw men.

 

[Abdul Fattah]

Selam aleykum

There is no such thing as altruism. There is always something in it for you.

I couldn't disagree more.
First of all, if an action has multiple motives, and among those motives are both altruistic motives as well as personal benefit, then that act is still altruistic. It's not like the two are mutually exclusive.
Secondly, if from those motives, the main motive is altruism, then surely I would judge such an act as mainly altruistic despite of whatever benefit it might bring one personally.
Thirdly, each action should be judged by its intentions, so even if an act has some personal benefit, but the person was not aware of that, then his motives were purely altruistic.
Then fourthly, I even disagree with the statement that "there's always something in it for you". Like I said, back when I was an atheist I would do purely altruistic deeds, even when I was convinced that there was absolutely no benefit in it for me.

Whether it be even the satisfaction of considering yourself altruistic. It doesn't exist. I am speaking theoretically and if you can't tolerate a person questioning the true meaning behind actions without trying to derive opinions about them as a person, then I pity you, brother.

I don't pity you because I cannot tolerate a person questioning this. In fact I can tolerate that quite easily. The only reason I said I would pity you in such a case, was because such a statement is most likely to be a projection of one self. All to often, when people try to figure out how people's mind work, they assume that everybody's mind works the same (at least the general lines). That is wrong. There can be huge differences. Like I said, people with ASD for example, have a high tendency to do altruistic acts merely out of ideology. This is just one example, my point is not everybody thinks and acts the same. And If you think that altruism doesn't exist, then I suspect that you think this because you are unable to do altruistic acts, and hence I pity you because of your lack to do so. Sorry if this offended you, I didn't meant this in a condescending or belittling way.

Everything has a reason even if you don't consciously acknowledge it.

Of course, but not every reason is necesairly selfish.

As for your reflection, I am sure you could make your own thread about that if you wish. The reactions I have recieved from the theists here indicate that to one degree or another, they would allow themselves to decline morally (though obviously not to the extent of murdering their neighbors). If they say that their upringing or culture would prevent them from declining, then it has to be asked, why obey those things anyways?

I was among one of those who admitted that my moral would decline, (in the lines of perhaps picking up old habits like smoking and drinking). However I also mentioned that I would probably remain altruistic, just like I was altruistic back when I was an atheist. The reason I would do so however, was not because altruism isn't sufficient to stop me from these habits, but rather because from an atheistic p.o.v. the evil-ness of such addictions is relative and thus from an atheistic p.o.v. the difficulty in abstaining from worldly pleasures would greatly outweigh the benefits for the greater good.

 

[barrio79]

Good point. And if you only do good out of fear of hell and promise of heaven, are you really good?

Pygoscelis has a good point would not we all behave in a moral manner if we were brought up in a moral and kind environment

 

[Azy]

You already admitted that you would steal in that other thread.

Yeah definitely but I think there's a difference between keeping some cash I found in the street and the collapse of civilisation.

 

[crayon]

I completely disagree with you. I'm with brother Abdul Fattah on this one; people can be good simply for the sake of being good. When I do something good, I don't always think about getting a reward for it. When I give an old lady my seat on the bus, or help someone carry their groceries, I'm not always doing it for the hasanat, I'm doing it to be a good person. I believe humans are innately good, that they are altruistic, even for no reward.

But like brother Abdul said, there is a distinction to be made between forbidden things in Islam and morally reprehensible acts. One is not necessarily the other. Some things in Islam are not forbidden because they are morally wrong, but because they are harmful in other ways. So, for example, smoking cigarettes is not the same as murder. To put it in another way; Is it morally wrong to eat pork? Does that question even make sense?

Oh, also.. Children are born with fitra. From wiki:

Fitra is an Arabic word meaning 'innate human nature'. However, other common translations include "primordial nature" and "innate disposition".
According to Islamic theology, human beings are born with an innate knowledge of tawhid, which is encapsulated in the fitra along with intelligence, ihsan and all other attributes that embody what it is to be human.

So, hypothetically, even if there were no God, since we are humans by definition, we would still have this fitra, this innate tendency to be good.

 

[Brasco]

I completely disagree with you. I'm with brother Abdul Fattah on this one; people can be good simply for the sake of being good. When I do something good, I don't always think about getting a reward for it. When I give an old lady my seat on the bus, or help someone carry their groceries, I'm not always doing it for the hasanat, I'm doing it to be a good person. I believe humans are innately good, that they are altruistic, even for no reward.

This is also exactly what I think. I know a couple of people who are atheists but they're really good in their behaviour.

 

[Uthman]

I probably would behave less morally but there is a difference between that and complete immorality. Certainly, I would pay less attention to the finer details of morality and there would probably be more times when my self interest came before those of my fellow human beings.

Islam came and it perfected morality and good manners and almost makes it an art. This becomes clear from reading such works as Imaam Al-Bukhaari's Al Adab al Mufrad.

To add to what I said above, I think a case in point would be the way that I behave here on the forum. There are times when I feel the urge to lash out at certain members who speak very offensively about Islam and/or Muslims. My belief in Islam is what restrains me from doing so as I am reminded of the example of Prophet Muhammad (May Allah's peace and blessings be upon him).

Aside from that, I would probably backbite a lot more and be less obedient and dutiful towards my parents. Interestingly, I don't behave in this way primarily due to fear of punishment (although perhaps I should). I tend to do it out of love for the teachings themselves.

 

[AntiKarateKid]

Yeah definitely but I think there's a difference between keeping some cash I found in the street and the collapse of civilisation.

Name where I said civilization would collapse.

 

[AntiKarateKid]

Selam aleykum

I couldn't disagree more.
First of all, if an action has multiple motives, and among those motives are both altruistic motives as well as personal benefit, then that act is still altruistic. It's not like the two are mutually exclusive.
Secondly, if from those motives, the main motive is altruism, then surely I would judge such an act as mainly altruistic despite of whatever benefit it might bring one personally.
Thirdly, each action should be judged by its intentions, so even if an act has some personal benefit, but the person was not aware of that, then his motives were purely altruistic.
Then fourthly, I even disagree with the statement that "there's always something in it for you". Like I said, back when I was an atheist I would do purely altruistic deeds, even when I was convinced that there was absolutely no benefit in it for me.

Brother, you contradict yourself in the beginning of your post. Altruism, when defined as doing something for someone else without gaining anything for yourself, is incompatible with your example. If a action has multiple motives and ANY of them have to do with the person in question benefiting, it is not altruism. No matter how many motives, they are part of the same action. Like I said before, I disagree with your claim that people can do good deeds or even any action without subconscious or conscious thought. If a hunter says he ran from a lion without even thinking about it, it is because of the conditioning that he recieved in his life. The same applies to the acts you mentioned. Your upbringing conditioned you to make those judgements. Moreover, it is impossible for a complex action like giveing up a seat on the bus, to take place in the mind "without thinking".

I don't pity you because I cannot tolerate a person questioning this. In fact I can tolerate that quite easily. The only reason I said I would pity you in such a case, was because such a statement is most likely to be a projection of one self. All to often, when people try to figure out how people's mind work, they assume that everybody's mind works the same (at least the general lines). That is wrong. There can be huge differences. Like I said, people with ASD for example, have a high tendency to do altruistic acts merely out of ideology. This is just one example, my point is not everybody thinks and acts the same. And If you think that altruism doesn't exist, then I suspect that you think this because you are unable to do altruistic acts, and hence I pity you because of your lack to do so. Sorry if this offended you, I didn't meant this in a condescending or belittling way.

First, altruism doesn't even exist in Islam. We do acts for Allah's sake because we are rewarded for our intentions. Do you think that a man who does something "without thinking" would be as valued in Allahs eyes as someone who thought and acted? I hold humanity in high regard because Allah has created us to think. And to say that a person can commit higher and more complex actions "without thinking" is a biological, psychological, and spiritual impossibility. You'll forgive me if I dismiss you're psychoanalysis as silly.

Of course, but not every reason is necesairly selfish.

Even in Islam our actions come back to ourselves. Allah has told us that we are guided for our own benefit and misguided for our own detriment. We don't become good by disregarding our "selfish" motives but rather fusing such things as your neighbor's happiness as a necessary part of your own.

I was among one of those who admitted that my moral would decline, (in the lines of perhaps picking up old habits like smoking and drinking). However I also mentioned that I would probably remain altruistic, just like I was altruistic back when I was an atheist. The reason I would do so however, was not because altruism isn't sufficient to stop me from these habits, but rather because from an atheistic p.o.v. the evil-ness of such addictions is relative and thus from an atheistic p.o.v. the difficulty in abstaining from worldly pleasures would greatly outweigh the benefits for the greater good.

Aside from your claims of altruism which I totally deny. I agree with you saying that we would suffer a moral decline.

Salam bro. Let's leave your pity and my thoughts about you being naive out of this. It's an interesting talk.

 

[Abdul Fattah]

Brother, you contradict yourself in the beginning of your post. Altruism, when defined as doing something for someone else without gaining anything for yourself, is incompatible with your example.

Well I had a different definition in mind when posting this. After google-ing it, it seems your definition is indeed more correct. So although I admit I might have used incorrect terminology to defend my position, I think my arguments still stand:
1) Some people do Good things, mainly because of their ideology, and not due to their personal benefit.
2) Even if there is personal benefit in such an act, it can still be that the interest in other's well-being is the main drive.
3) Actions should be judged by intentions
4) I still hold that people are capable of acts which serve no personal benefit.

Like I said before, I disagree with your claim that people can do good deeds or even any action without subconscious or conscious thought.

I didn't claim that these actions are without subconscious or conscious thought. Instead what I argued was that there are actions with no personal agenda.

First, altruism doesn't even exist in Islam.

I disagree: None of you [truly] believes until he loves for his brother that which he loves for himself.

We do acts for Allah's sake because we are rewarded for our intentions. Do you think that a man who does something "without thinking" would be as valued in Allahs eyes as someone who thought and acted?

Again, I never said anything about acts without thinking.

Of course, but not every reason is necesairly selfish.

Even in Islam our actions come back to ourselves. Allah has told us that we are guided for our own benefit and misguided for our own detriment. We don't become good by disregarding our "selfish" motives but rather fusing such things as your neighbor's happiness as a necessary part of your own.

I don't see how your reply answers my argument.

Aside from your claims of altruism which I totally deny. I agree with you saying that we would suffer a moral decline.

Well I'm pretty sure that I have done acts which were completely selfless and which I didn't like doing, but I did merely out of altruistic motives. If you don't want to believe me, well that's your choice, and quite frankly, I can't be bothered with convincing you what my personal motives of my past actions have been.

 

[Azy]

Name where I said civilization would collapse.

Never said you did. Just that you seemed to be insinuating that me being a serial killer isn't unreasonable given that I'd keep some money I found. I might be totally amoral but I'm not stupid.

It does seem that the theists believe civilisation would be much more difficult to maintain if there was no God.

Other than the "well being of society" which is a very ambiguous term, I see no reason not to be less moral. I really don't even have to give a hoot about others.

I'm not even a percent of earth life; less so than in this solar system; even less in this galaxy...what does it matter if I play by the rules or not?

There's plenty of good reasons to be moral without a God, like not having to look over your shoulder 24/7 because you annoyed/injured/stole from everyone. I take it you still feel pain and don't really want to die?

 

[AntiKarateKid]

Well I had a different definition in mind when posting this. After google-ing it, it seems your definition is indeed more correct. So although I admit I might have used incorrect terminology to defend my position, I think my arguments still stand:
1) Some people do Good things, mainly because of their ideology, and not due to their personal benefit.
2) Even if there is personal benefit in such an act, it can still be that the interest in other's well-being is the main drive.
3) Actions should be judged by intentions
4) I still hold that people are capable of acts which serve no personal benefit.

1. Every action a person does is influenced by their beliefs in one way or another. Or else why would we even bother doing them? Things don't happen spontaneously, they happen with reason, subtle or overt.

2. But that begs the question, what inspired the drive to have interest in the other's well being.

3. They are indeed. Intentions are influenced by one's beliefs. And why does one subscribe to a belief? Because it will benefit them in one way or another.
Truth always benefits those who realize it.

4. I think I might know why you disagree.It is not wrong to expect a reward for a "good" action. What matters is what you expect. We, as Muslims, are able to be better people because we are not compromised by the expectation of a reward in this life. We do an act because Allah, who is free of bias, has commanded us to and we are not affected if say, a good action turns out to make the recipient unhappy, because it doesn't depend on their response to be good. Moreover, Allah himself has legislated that our selflessness be rewarded. So why do you oppose us benefiting?

Is there any Reward for Good - other than Good? (Quran)

I didn't claim that these actions are without subconscious or conscious thought. Instead what I argued was that there are actions with no personal agenda.

Then if there was thought, why do you think that thought was there? We don't keep harmful impulses in us, ready to be loosed. Instead an action such as giving up one's seat can have motives such as being able to say that "you did it for the sake of doing it" or something physical or something psychological or spiritual.

I disagree: None of you [truly] believes until he loves for his brother that which he loves for himself.

I agree.

Again, I never said anything about acts without thinking.

Ok so if there was thought then what was the motive that caused the thought?

I don't see how your reply answers my argument.

Neither do I LOL.

Well I'm pretty sure that I have done acts which were completely selfless and which I didn't like doing, but I did merely out of altruistic motives. If you don't want to believe me, well that's your choice, and quite frankly, I can't be bothered with convincing you what my personal motives of my past actions have been.

To be clear, I wasn't passing judgment on your personal motives. I denied your position on altruism existing. I have no doubt that you're an upstanding Muslim.

Salam.

 

[alcurad]

brother AntiKarateKid, all actions are based on 'unconscious' processes to begin with, consciousness is over rated. we can alter our behavior, but even that is constrained.

morals are a product of humans forming societies and what followed, without them, no society functions properly. they don't need a certain model of God, but they do require A god.
religion embodies the wisdom of the many lessons of the past, since such information is not easily held/transmitted, it takes the shape of religion hence morals are incorporated in it alongside with deities.
without religion/god there would be no well-functioning society on the long run, it's what made civilization possible in the first place.

"Do you think that a man who does something "without thinking" would be as valued in Allah's eyes as someone who thought and acted?"

what do you base that assumption on though? we don't know how the creator 'values' us to this extent, no?
also, if you 'act without thinking' it's simply that you had already 'thought' of the situation, it just didn't pass through consciousness this time, it was already ingrained, but nonetheless it Was based on conscious decisions earlier, thus God rewarding such actions or not is not so clear cut.

"And to say that a person can commit higher and more complex actions "without thinking" is a biological, psychological, and spiritual impossibility."
a wide stroke of the brush, needs much backing.

good discussion , keep it up.

 

[barrio79]

There is no such thing as altruism. There is always something in it for you. Whether it be even the satisfaction of considering yourself altruistic. It doesn't exist. I am speaking theoretically and if you can't tolerate a person questioning the true meaning behind actions without trying to derive opinions about them as a person, then I pity you, brother. Everything has a reason even if you don't consciously acknowledge it.

As for your reflection, I am sure you could make your own thread about that if you wish. The reactions I have recieved from the theists here indicate that to one degree or another, they would allow themselves to decline morally (though obviously not to the extent of murdering their neighbors). If they say that their upringing or culture would prevent them from declining, then it has to be asked, why obey those things anyways? I certainly catch your drift and if you would like you can make a thread on it or PM me and I'm happy to talk while I procrastinate here.

I have to say, I enjoyed reading your posts on this board but am disappointed by your frankly nonsense claim about me and your "pity" statement.

"There is no such thing as altruism. " There is such a thing as altruism its just that not everyone comes in contact with it or experiences it if they do not live in a community where it can flourish

 

[AntiKarateKid]

Bro Abdul Fattah and Alcurad make good points so I'm going to have to think about think a bit more later, perhaps make a thread in the Aqeeda section about altruism and Islam. I need to make sure what I'm saying has basis in Islam before getting into an extended discussion.

But until then, my original question has been answered. The theists here do believe that they would morally decline. S

So a mod is free to close this thread if they wish.

 

[barrio79]

before you close : remember that new born children are born innocent, as pure as the driven snow ; ie. without sin

 

[AntiKarateKid]

before you close : remember that new born children are born innocent, as pure as the driven snow ; ie. without sin

That is part of Islam. There is no original sin. Allah forgave Adam, who repented.