Thread: Can Morality Evolve Without Spirituality?

Amber Leaf - No metaphor intended nor, as you point out, is one needed. Consider that I am a lifelong atheist, which I think everyone else here already understands, and read all my post again.

Originally Posted by garza

The short answer to the original post is, no, it cannot.

But consider how much depends on how we define 'spiritual'. Do we mean something supernatural? Or do we mean natural human reason, affection, and emotion?

Nothing supernatural has ever been a part of my personal belief system. The world is exactly what it appears to be in bright sunlight. The shadows of evening and the black of midnight do not hide mysteries, but only cover in darkness for a little while the reality we will find again come the morning.

Spiritually we live in a pre-dawn epoch, groping in the dark. We do murder in the name of religion and call it righteousness, or in the name of politics and call it patriotism. We steal in the name of prosperity and call our greed good business. We race to find paradise as we blindly trample underfoot those who live in torment all around us.

When our true spiritual natures are awakened the sun will rise on a new day. We will walk in the light. Each of us will look on every other human and see a brother or a sister, a member of our beloved family. Each of us will see that harm done to another is harm done to ourselves. Each of us will defend the one who is weak, share what we have with the one who has not, offer hope to the one in whom hope has died.

We will understand that to help another is the only good, to hurt another the only evil.

The world is exactly what it appears to be in bright sunlight, but too many walk in the shadows.

this guy is good.

Originally Posted by Amber Leaf

This is the intelligent design theory. A theory is something yet to be validated.

It could also be the case that the big bang happened, planets and stars were formed and our planet ended up in a good enough spot to support life.

The later theory is also supported by some experience rather than just here-say.

The Big Bang theory was created by a Catholic Priest that was a professor at MIT, Amber.

Being a Priest is contingent upon believing in a First Cause (as theologian sometimes refer to God) or stated another way... being a Priest is contingent upon believing in an Intelligent Designer.

In other words one can believe in the Big Bang and evolution and acknowledge the existence of God. And given that Christians seem to have developed the Western World's form of scientific methodology, it would stand to reason one can be religious and use the scientific method to study natural phenomena.

Originally Posted by Robinjazz

It's historical only to fools and idiots. What has more value than human life? A stupid wall that stupid people idolize?

Truth is, some folks won't recognize the truth if it walked up to them and slapped them across the face. Wake up, walls are still being built--all around you. And it isn't any God who's constructing them.

Should we bulldoze the buildings at Auschwitz and build a shopping mall? How about the Coliseum in Rome -- after all, the Roman's killed people there. Workers likely died building it too -- they didn't have OSHA in those days.

You've no doubt heard this: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." Do you disagree with that? Do we promote "truth" by burying it with a bulldozer?

Because we value life is precisely why we should preserve landmarks associated with injustice.

Lamperoux - Thank you.

Originally Posted by Amber Leaf

How would you define what a moral is?

Maybe it would help bring greater clarity to the subject of morality if we distinguished it from the specific concept of ethics. I realize both are used interchangeably often - not always.

If we define ethics as codes of behavior stemming from secular elites or majority consensus, and if we define morals as codes of behavior and thoughts stemming from a metaphysical source that implements a universal law on humanity and exists irrespective, at minimum of majority consensus or legislative powers of secular elites, then we might narrow down what we mean by "morals."

Morals being: monogamy vs polygamy.

Ethics being: parameters imposed or not upon doctor and patient relations.

You could look at rape and murder in an objective sense. In human society, rape and murder are considered wrong. This is a moral that stems the continents regardless of religion, politics and culture.

There is some truth - some - in that. That's what is referred to as "natural law." All 5 major religions and secular philosophers acknowledge natural law to one extent or another. It's one of their sources for find some common ground when they engage each other in their philosophical discussions.

On the other hand murder - or what we would regard as murder in the 21st century across all continents - was accepted as morally sound in some cultures when it was in the form of human sacrificial offerings. Cannibalism as well.

Just about all cultures have been opposed to forcible rape, but not all that many when it came to pederasty. Pederasty was pretty prevalent at one time among some ethnic cultures in Catholicism and Islam irrespective of the anti-homosexual teachings of both Catholicism and Islam. I'm thinking of the Italians and Turks. But I've heard in contemporary Afghanistan taking young "boy wives" still happens. I'm not sure how true that claim is though.

Originally Posted by JosephB

Dumb America and European tourists visit the great wall of China because of it's historical value. For the day, it was an amazing accomplishment -- regardless of who provided the labor -- and had an impact on the history of China and the region. Are you suggesting we boycott historical landmarks that were built by oppressive regimes? We can't learn anything from them?

LMAO.

Originally Posted by garza

The short answer to the original post is, no, it cannot.

But consider how much depends on how we define 'spiritual'. Do we mean something supernatural? Or do we mean natural human reason, affection, and emotion?

Nothing supernatural has ever been a part of my personal belief system. The world is exactly what it appears to be in bright sunlight. The shadows of evening and the black of midnight do not hide mysteries, but only cover in darkness for a little while the reality we will find again come the morning.

Spiritually we live in a pre-dawn epoch, groping in the dark. We do murder in the name of religion and call it righteousness, or in the name of politics and call it patriotism. We steal in the name of prosperity and call our greed good business. We race to find paradise as we blindly trample underfoot those who live in torment all around us.

When our true spiritual natures are awakened the sun will rise on a new day. We will walk in the light. Each of us will look on every other human and see a brother or a sister, a member of our beloved family. Each of us will see that harm done to another is harm done to ourselves. Each of us will defend the one who is weak, share what we have with the one who has not, offer hope to the one in whom hope has died.

We will understand that to help another is the only good, to hurt another the only evil.

The world is exactly what it appears to be in bright sunlight, but too many walk in the shadows.

Nice post.

Although I doubt that day will ever come (I cede the world has gotten better in many respects). I'm pretty certain it won't begin with me. LOL.

Originally Posted by Writ-with-Hand

LMAO.

Heh. Are you laughing at me or with me?

Originally Posted by Amber Leaf

You are 'God' too by the way. Why don't you do something about it?

LOL. You can be female and believe in God (of any religion or agnostic) and even be a Christian too, Amber.

Trust... I was taught be nuns as a small child. The Virgin Mary - the greatest historical human person to Catholics, Jesus was a human being but a divine person, hence he had 2 natures - was venerated long before Hillary Clinton. Probably not before Cleopatra though... but the Holy Mother gave birth to God, saved humanity, was assumed body and soul into heaven, and has more adherents across all continents than old Cleo... so I'd say Santa Maria won.

And if God was referred to as a she it might help Christian male's egos. LOL. Given that Jesus is the bridegroom and all the men (and women) in his Church are his brides. God the father is referred to in male gender form, partly because God spiritually acts as a penis ejaculating into the souls of men.

One would think the story of the Virgin Mary giving birth to God, not needing a man's penis nor his semen, nor a husband other than for a man to serve her and provide for her, would be the ultimate Lesbian feminist story. Of course that a woman shows less humility before God than a faithful man (the man being emasculated and the effeminate of God's) probably lends her to a blindness when she is puffed up in wrath and pride.




See... one can be woman, educated, and Christian. Not a dangerous thing.

Canadian Jesuits International - News & Events > New Staff Members at Jesu Ashram

CJI welcomes the new staff members at Jesu Ashram. The new additions are Sr. Dr. Sarita who is a medical doctor and a religious sister of the Daughters of the Cross of Calcutta province. Two Jesuits, Fr. Basil Topp and Brother Gilbert have also joined the team. There are now four Jesuits and four sisters of the Daughters of the Cross now working at Jesu Ashram.
Jesu Ashram provides free medical treatment, care and social services to the sick especially the very poor people and their families. They work with people affected by tuberculosis, HIV/AIDS and leprosy treating about 350 patients annually regardless of caste or creed. The staff is made up of a core group of about 20 nurses and doctors supported by a dedicated group of men and woman who have been successfully treated by the Ashram, who now work as caregivers for current patients.

Originally Posted by JosephB

Heh. Are you laughing at me or with me?

With you. I wasn't laughing at Robinjazz either. I just found your reply to him funny - and I agreed with your view.

Or these women, Amber:

Medical Missionaries of Mary - about the medical missionaries of mary

The wide range of health services is provided by MMM Sisters and co-workers is holistic - our concern is for the whole person, not just their illness or injury. For some Sisters this may involve complicated surgery in hospitals, keeping up to date with the latest advances in anti-retroviral therapies for HIV, or in palliative care for those who are chronically or terminally ill.

Many other Sisters are involved in health education, and work at grassroots level with local people wherever we are on mission.

In line with the policies of the World Health Organization - especially since the Declaration of Alma Ata in 1978 - Medical Missionaries of Mary place great emphasis on Community-based Health Care.

We promote therapies that complement western medicine wherever possible, with particular attention to growing plants that cure.

And.

HOW THE MEDICAL BRANCH BEGAN-Medical Missionaries, POSC


Sr. Dede Byrne, MD with Mr. Jack Cheasty, Physician Assistant

In other words one can believe in the Big Bang and evolution and acknowledge the existence of God. And given that Christians seem to have developed the Western World's form of scientific methodology, it would stand to reason one can be religious and use the scientific method to study natural phenomena.

Fair enough. Doesn't change that they are both still just theories.

Consider that I am a lifelong atheist, which I think everyone else here already understands, and read all my post again.

But you believe in the spiritual realm.

If we define ethics as codes of behavior stemming from secular elites or majority consensus, and if we define morals as codes of behavior and thoughts stemming from a metaphysical source that implements a universal law on humanity and exists irrespective, at minimum of majority consensus or legislative powers of secular elites, then we might narrow down what we mean by "morals."

If YOU define ethics as you do and if YOU define morals as having anything at all to do with metaphysics then we might narrow down what YOU mean by "morals". The meaning of morality and ethics has changed over time and still does as we adapt to each other. Moral codes do not exist purely because of metaphysical reasons. They exist because they are the compromises we make to exist together.

There is some truth - some - in that. That's what is referred to as "natural law." All 5 major religions and secular philosophers acknowledge natural law to one extent or another. It's one of their sources for find some common ground when they engage each other in their philosophical discussions.

How would you define natural law? I would count what I said as being common law.

All your examples of places where rape and murder have taken place have been within religious organisations. That counts as abuse of power and against what is common (knowledge) law so that people can co-exist without this kind of abuse.

Of course it can. Morality, in the end, is basically a pragmatic course. Take the Golden Rule, for example: "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you." That's a quite logical, pragmatic statement. A viewpoint that centers around the concept of 'live and let live'. It doesn't counsel treating others well as a hedge against an angry God or all-knowing karma, it counsels treating others well as a way to be treated well yourself: action leads to benefit. Pure pragmatism. In a sense, the modern insistence on fair, timely trials, 'innocent until proven guilty' and humane treatment of accused criminals all center around the idea that each individual would want those things in the same situation, so it's only moral to extend those things to others.

More than anything else, this points out the reciprocal nature of individual rights.

LOL. You can be female and believe in God (of any religion or agnostic) and even be a Christian too, Amber.

We are all individual'('God')s.

I know what you are saying. I have read the documents from the Vatican II council and how they bent the rules to appeal to a wider audience.

Trust... I was taught be nuns as a small child.

I can tell. I was also sent to catholic school.

See... one can be woman, educated, and Christian. Not a dangerous thing.

I really don't understand your tangent here. It has nothing at all to do with the debate.

The women in the stories are doing good deeds because they believe in the Christian God and believe there will be some kind of glory in it for them when they die. So what? Have I to scour the internet for stories of people who have no faith who have done good deeds? There's plenty of them out there.

Have we answered the OP yet? Can we at least get back onto the questions if not?