God's moral code

[vheRR]

@vHeRR, after you answer skitz's question first, i've been meaning to ask you another: Where does your "man is a social animal" concept end, and where does the quote in your signature from Richard Dawkins start? The quote: "We are survival machines — robot vehicles blindly programmed to preserve the selfish molecules known as genes."

 

Please tell us how the two concepts are reconcilable with each other.

 

PUNTA ka…

 

… sa Google,

 

… o kaya naman ay sa Wikipedia,

 

 

 

… i-TYPE mo,

 

 

… "The Selfish Gene".

[JHP]

"ASO" lang ba…

… ang "HAYOP na ALAM MO"?

...DI BA IKAW ANG GUMAMIT NG ASO BILANG HALIMBAWA?

 

...O BAKA SA totoo lang

 

...DI MO kaya SAGUTIN?

Edited January 11, 2011 by JHP

[JHP]

AAMININ MO ba…

 

… kung SAKALING "TAMA AKO"?

 

 

 

… ang TANONG,

"… kay DALI rin kayang GAWIN?"

"KAY DALI MO bang GAGAWIN na IBUWIS ang BUHAY MO"...

… sa "LAHAT" ng "PAGKAKATAON"?

 

"KAY DALI MO bang GAGAWIN na IBUWIS ang BUHAY MO"...

 

… sa "LAHAT" ng "TAO"?

 

 

 

… so, BAKIT nga?

 

Ah…

 

Eh…

 

 

… "HINDI MO ba ALAM",

 

… na "WALANG HANGGANG BUHAY" na "GANTIMPALA" ang IBINIBIGAY ng DIOS MO sa mga SUSUNOD sa UTOS NIYA,

 

… KAPAG "ISINASAKRIPISYO" MO ang IYONG BUHAY PARA sa IBA?

 

 

 

… "HINDI KA ba NANINIWALA",

 

… na "WALANG HANGGANG BUHAY" na "GANTIMPALA" ang IBINIBIGAY ng DIOS MO sa mga SUSUNOD sa UTOS NIYA,

 

… HABANG "ISINASAKRIPISYO" MO ang IYONG BUHAY PARA sa IBA?

 

 

 

… "HINDI KA ba NAKATITIYAK",

 

… na "WALANG HANGGANG BUHAY" na "GANTIMPALA" ang IBINIBIGAY ng DIOS MO sa mga SUSUNOD sa UTOS NIYA,

 

… HABANG "ISINASAKRIPISYO" MO ang IYONG BUHAY PARA sa IBA?

 

 

… hard for you to understand?

 

… and so,

 

… balikan natin,

 

 

… MAY mga THEIST ba na PUMATAY ng PARA sa KANYANG DIOS?

 

… MERON o WALA?

 

[/color][/color][/color]

… at kung MERON ang ISASAGOT MO,

 

… "MABUTI ba o MASAMA" ang PUMATAY ng PARA sa KANYANG DIOS?

 

 

 

As always, you miss the point…

 

… "NATITIYAK" MO na TOTOO ang DIOS MO,

 

… NGUNIT "HINDI MO MATIYAK" kung "KAILAN" nga ba IPINANGANAK ang DIOS MO? :lol:

 

 

 

...Alam mo ba

 

...kelan pinanganak

 

...ang tatay ng tatay ng tatay ng tatay ng tatay ng tatay ng tatay ng tatay mo?

Edited January 11, 2011 by JHP

[JHP]

PUNTA ka…

 

… sa Google,

 

… o kaya naman ay sa Wikipedia,

 

 

 

… i-TYPE mo,

 

 

… "The Selfish Gene".

...KUNG WALANG INTERNET

 

...di mo na kayang ipaliwanag?

 

...O di ba kaya

 

...WALA KANG PALIWANANG O SAGOT

 

...NA MAY SAYSAY?

Edited January 11, 2011 by JHP

[vheRR]

...DI BA IKAW ANG GUMAMIT NG ASO BILANG HALIMBAWA?

 

...O BAKA SA totoo lang

 

...DI MO kaya SAGUTIN?

 

May SINABI ba AKO na...

... ASO LANG ang HAYOP?

 

 

Scientist Finds the Beginnings of Morality in Primate behavior

 

 

Great Apes Know They Could Be Wrong, Research Suggests

 

 

Empathy Partly Based On Genes, Mouse Study Shows

[vheRR]

...Alam mo ba

 

...kelan pinanganak

 

...ang tatay ng tatay ng tatay ng tatay ng tatay ng tatay ng tatay ng tatay mo?[/color][/font][/color]

 

IPINAGDIRIWANG KO ba TAUN-TAON ang ARAW ng KAPANGANAKAN ng...

... ng tatay ng tatay ng tatay ng tatay ng tatay ng tatay ng tatay ng tatay ko?

 

 

 

At SINASAMBA KO ba...

... ang tatay ng tatay ng tatay ng tatay ng tatay ng tatay ng tatay ng tatay ko? :lol:

[vheRR]

...KUNG WALANG INTERNET

 

...di mo na kayang ipaliwanag?

 

...O di ba kaya

 

...WALA KANG PALIWANANG O SAGOT

 

...NA MAY SAYSAY?

 

Ang KASO...

 

... "MAYROONG" INTERNET.

SASABIHIN KO bang HANAPIN MO sa INTERNET...

... kung WALANG INTERNET? :lol:

 

... at IMBALIDO o PARALISADO KA ba?

[skitz]

Vherr,

 

What's with all the effort to prove that God does not exist? Again, I emphasize, as far as this thread is concerned it is ASSUMED that God does not exist (for argument's sake). The question is, what moral code are we going to have (since the God moral code would be no longer valid).

 

But I think, though unintentional, you've answered that question at least. How's that again? How do we treat people that are HIV positive? NO DEFINITE ANSWER. And that, more than anything else, clearly illustrates the point. Without a MORAL ANCHOR (the God moral code), we are LOST. Thank you.

Edited February 9, 2011 by skitz

[cbr600rr]

Good PM, Skitz.

 

If I may, just wanted to put in perspective your comment: "Without a MORAL ANCHOR (the God moral code), we are LOST." ; vis-a-vis what VheRR seems to be saying - I was doing some backreading.

 

I also read the links of VheRR:

Scientist Finds the Beginnings of Morality in Primate behavior

Great Apes Know They Could Be Wrong, Research Suggests

Empathy Partly Based On Genes, Mouse Study Shows

 

I think what he's saying is that he agrees with you that man should have a MORAL ANCHOR, but he does not agree with you (and me for that matter) that this MORAL ANCHOR has to come from a divine being.

 

The articles and quotes in his signature : "We are survival machinesrobot vehicles blindly programmed" seem to suggest that it's in people's genes to have a MORAL ANCHOR, and therefore does not need God for this.

Edited February 16, 2011 by cbr600rr

[cbr600rr]

Comment ko naman kay vheRR:

 

Judging from your posts, shared articles, and even your signature which includes the quote "The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent full of doubt.", it appears that you feel that people who believe in God are somewhat foolish, or borrowing the words of Mr. Russel, "the stupid are cocksure".

 

However, what you have to appreciate (although not necessarily accept) is that, we who believe in God, are fully cognizant of and accept the facts ...

... that we have no empirical and physical evidence to show you that God exists, but we go on believing anyway.

... that for some people like yourself and Mr. Russel, this belief may make us look foolish or even stupid, but we go on believing anyway.

... that believing in Him and "TRYING OUR DARNDEST BEST" to follow His ways may put us at a survival dis-advantage, but we go on believing (and TRYING) anyway. (TRYING being the operative word!)

 

You see, to me and many others, we feel that it's off the mark when others say that people who believe in God are "cocksure". Please understand that God fearing people are never really sure in the sense that we have black and white proof, we just simply believe even - without hard direct proof. Please understand that holding on to this belief is a life long adventure. You see, this belief is often shaken whenever disaster strikes or during serious crisis in health, family, or relationships occurr. During these trying times, keeping this faith and belief in His presence and goodness despite all the overwhelming arguments to the contrary is a extremely difficult and self-inflicted burden.

 

Self inflicted because it is a choice. We can choose to carry the faith and continue to put ourselves at a survival dis-advantage and be branded by people as "stupid, cocksure". Or, take the easy way out and take the route of "the intelligent", and eventually rule out God in our lives.

 

Maybe you'd agree with me that the former, although you may consider it as "stupid", is the more difficult choice. So, even if you don't share this belief, you must at least appreciate and have a healthy respect for the difficulty and burden that people take on in this life long challenge of believing. I do hope that you are not as arrogant as Mr. Russel, by not being able to appreciate the depth and difficulty level of what God fearing people are trying to achieve.

 

When their faith is shaken and their belief is put in question, and then someone puts forth the option to believe in MAN BEING A SOCIAL ANIMAL and erase God from the formula - this becomes such an enticing escape option (was this what happened to you?) You see, for a lot of us, we feel that we are lucky that when these faith crisis moments come, there are people who miraculously comes in to help us or at least encourage us, and pick us up and cheer us back to fighting form.

 

So you see, we not "cocksure", rather the word to describe us is "GRATEFUL", and perhaps even "HAPPY".

Edited February 16, 2011 by cbr600rr

[skitz]

cbr600rr,

 

The trouble with this "innate moral anchor hardwired into our genes" (as suggested by vherr), is that it is different for every individual. Hence, vherr, mindful of that, can not offer a definite answer for a specific scenario. The "innate morale code" is different, say, for the Nazis as it is from Mahatma Gandhi. I can see the cold logic of the Nazis, mind you. There is logic to that brand of madness. Why not k*ll off the "unclean" and rid the human genetic pool of retards and misfits? Why not, indeed? Ah, but yes, my moral anchor, centered on God, prevents me from fully subscribing to that notion. However swayed I am by pure logic, I KNOW that there is a higher moral anchor that as a human being I must follow. Otherwise, I am just an animal. A logical animal, but an animal nonetheless.

 

So again atheists, without God, what should be man's moral anchor? There is a post here somewhere that suggested "we try something else" (other than the God moral code). So ok, what then? Supply the alternative.

[vheRR]

Vherr,

 

What's with all the effort to prove that God does not exist?

 

 

… CORRECTION,

… BINIBIGYANG-DIIN KO lang,

 

… ang "KAWALAN" NYO ng PATUNAY sa SINASABING TOTOO.

 

Again, I emphasize, as far as this thread is concerned it is ASSUMED that God does not exist (for argument's sake). The question is, what moral code are we going to have (since the God moral code would be no longer valid).

 

… kung ANO ang MORAL CODE na MAYROON ang TAO sa NGAYON,

 

… AALISIN nga lang,

 

… "PARUSA ng PAGKA-IMPIYERNO",

… at "GANTIMPALA na WALANG-HANGGAN-BUHAY".

 

But I think, though unintentional, you've answered that question at least. How's that again? How do we treat people that are HIV positive? NO DEFINITE ANSWER. And that, more than anything else, clearly illustrates the point. Without a MORAL ANCHOR (the God moral code), we are LOST. Thank you.

 

… are YOU LOST,

… kapag WALA palang NAGPAPARUSA at NAGGAGANTIMPALA?

 

… LOST ba,

 

… gayung bagamat MAYKUMUKUTYA, ay MAYROON namang NAGMAMAHAL?

 

… LOST ba,

… gayung bagamat MAY NANDIDIRI, ay MAYROON namang NAG-AALAGA?

 

… LOST ba,

… gayung bagamat NILALAYUAN, ay MAYROON namang NAGPU-PROTEKTA?

 

[vheRR]

Comment ko naman kay vheRR:

 

Judging from your posts, shared articles, and even your signature which includes the quote "The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent full of doubt.", it appears that you feel that people who believe in God are somewhat foolish, or borrowing the words of Mr. Russel, "the stupid are cocksure".

 

However, what you have to appreciate (although not necessarily accept) is that, we who believe in God, are fully cognizant of and accept the facts ...

... that we have no empirical and physical evidence to show you that God exists, but we go on believing anyway.

... that for some people like yourself and Mr. Russel, this belief may make us look foolish or even stupid, but we go on believing anyway.

... that believing in Him and "TRYING OUR DARNDEST BEST" to follow His ways may put us at a survival dis-advantage, but we go on believing (and TRYING) anyway. (TRYING being the operative word!)

 

 

 

… ang kaso,

… HIGIT na MARAMING THEIST pa rin ang HINDI TULAD ng IYONG PANANAW at PANINIWALA,

… HIGIT na MARAMING THEIST pa rin ang "NAGTITIYAK" na TOTOO ang DIOS NILA,

… HIGIT na MARAMING THEIST pa rin ang "NAGSASABI" na MAYROON SILANG PATUNAY,

… HIGIT na MARAMING THEIST pa rin ang "NANINIWALA" na MAYROON SILANG SAPAT at MATIBAY na PATUNAY.

 

 

You see, to me and many others, we feel that it's off the mark when others say that people who believe in God are "cocksure". Please understand that God fearing people are never really sure in the sense that we have black and white proof, we just simply believe even - without hard direct proof. Please understand that holding on to this belief is a life long adventure. You see, this belief is often shaken whenever disaster strikes or during serious crisis in health, family, or relationships occurr. During these trying times, keeping this faith and belief in His presence and goodness despite all the overwhelming arguments to the contrary is a extremely difficult and self-inflicted burden.

 

Self inflicted because it is a choice. We can choose to carry the faith and continue to put ourselves at a survival dis-advantage and be branded by people as "stupid, cocksure". Or, take the easy way out and take the route of "the intelligent", and eventually rule out God in our lives.

 

Maybe you'd agree with me that the former, although you may consider it as "stupid", is the more difficult choice. So, even if you don't share this belief, you must at least appreciate and have a healthy respect for the difficulty and burden that people take on in this life long challenge of believing. I do hope that you are not as arrogant as Mr. Russel, by not being able to appreciate the depth and difficulty level of what God fearing people are trying to achieve.

 

When their faith is shaken and their belief is put in question, and then someone puts forth the option to believe in MAN BEING A SOCIAL ANIMAL and erase God from the formula - this becomes such an enticing escape option (was this what happened to you?) You see, for a lot of us, we feel that we are lucky that when these faith crisis moments come, there are people who miraculously comes in to help us or at least encourage us, and pick us up and cheer us back to fighting form.

 

So you see, we not "cocksure", rather the word to describe us is "GRATEFUL", and perhaps even "HAPPY".

 

 

… "HIGIT na MAHIRAP" na KALIMUTAN / TIGILAN ang NAKALAKIHAN o NAKASANAYANG PANINIWALA,

… "HIGIT na MADALI" ang MANIWALA't UMASA na MAY MAKAPANGYARIHANG DIOS na SASAKLOLO sa ORAS ng KAGIPITAN KESA sa UMASA sa KAPWA na MAY LIMITASYON ang KAKAYAHAN,

… at "HIGIT na MADALI" ang HINDI MAG-ISIP KESA sa MAG-ISIP, at TANGGAPIN na DIOS ang SAGOT sa mga TANONG na WALANG SAGOT ang SIYENSIYA.

 

[vheRR]

cbr600rr,

 

The trouble with this "innate moral anchor hardwired into our genes" (as suggested by vherr), is that it is different for every individual. Hence, vherr, mindful of that, can not offer a definite answer for a specific scenario. The "innate morale code" is different, say, for the Nazis as it is from Mahatma Gandhi.

 

 

"IBA" ang ILONG KO sa ILONG MO at sa ILONG NIYA…

"IBA" ang KULAY ng BALAT KO sa KULAY ng BALAT MO at sa KULAY ng BALAT NIYA…

 

 

… kaso, HUWAG MO pa rin KALILIMUTAN,

 

 

… "PARE-PAREHO" pa rin TAYO na MAY ILONG,

… "PARE-PAREHO" pa rin TAYO na MAY BALAT.

I can see the cold logic of the Nazis, mind you. There is logic to that brand of madness. Why not k*ll off the "unclean" and rid the human genetic pool of retards and misfits? Why not, indeed? Ah, but yes, my moral anchor, centered on God, prevents me from fully subscribing to that notion. However swayed I am by pure logic, I KNOW that there is a higher moral anchor that as a human being I must follow. Otherwise, I am just an animal. A logical animal, but an animal nonetheless.

 

… talaga?

… hindi nga?

 

 

… halimbawa na isang RETARD o MISFIT ang "ANAK MO",

 

… PANINIWALA lang ba sa DIOS ang PUMIPIGIL sa IYO na PATAYIN ang "ANAK MO"?

 

 

... ANO kaya ang DAHILAN at HINDI MAIWAN ng INA na ito ang KANYANG PATAY nang ANAK,

 

http://images.sciencedaily.com/2010/04/100426131426-large.jpg

 

Video still of chimp mother with mummified infant. (Credit: Oxford University/Dora Biro)

How Chimps Deal With Death: Studies Offer Rare Glimpses

"We observed the deaths of two young infants -- both from a flu-like respiratory ailment," Biro said. "In each case, our observations showed a remarkable response by chimpanzee mothers to the death of their infants: they continued to carry the corpses for weeks, even months, following death.

.....

 

"Chimpanzees are humans' closest evolutionary relatives, and they have already been shown to resemble us in many of their cognitive functions: they empathize with others, have a sense of fairness, and can cooperate to achieve goals," Biro said. "How they perceive death is a fascinating question, and little data exist so far concerning chimpanzees' responses to the passing of familiar or related individuals either in captivity or in the wild. Our observations confirm the existence of an extremely powerful bond between mothers and their offspring which can persist, remarkably, even after the death of the infant, and they further call for efforts to elucidate the extent to which chimpanzees understand and are affected by the death of a close relative or group-mate. This would both have implications for our understanding of the evolutionary origins of human perceptions of death and provide insights into the way chimpanzees interpret the world around them."

So again atheists, without God, what should be man's moral anchor? There is a post here somewhere that suggested "we try something else" (other than the God moral code). So ok, what then? Supply the alternative.

 

 

... BALIKAN ang AKING POST #177,

 

 

… at WALANG IBINIGAY na MORAL CODE ang DIOS MO,

… DAHIL HINDI TOTOO ang DIOS MO.

[fashiznit78]

From the start, the basic premise of this thread is already in doubt. What are you trying to argue, that the moral code was god given or that without a moral code, god given or otherwise, man would be unable to advance and prosper?

 

Can you please change the title to something less theist inspired/derived?

 

That slight tantrum over, I shall endeavor to put my point of view on the whole morality issue.

 

Let's take a closer look at the basic concept of morality, at least from a Christian point of view.

 

The whole moral code of the Christians is taken In Toto from the Jews in the form of the Ten Commandments.

 

1. 'You shall have no other gods before Me.'
   
2. 'You shall not make for yourself a carved image--any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.'
   
3. 'You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain.'
   
4. 'Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.'
   
5. 'Honor your father and your mother.'
   
6. 'You shall not murder.'
   
7. 'You shall not commit adultery.'
   
8. 'You shall not steal.'
   
9. 'You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.'
   
10. 'You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall not covet your neighbor's wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor's.'

 

Let us try to summarize the whole thing though. The first 4 basically says "Love God above all else" and thus from a theistically neutral point of view don't really count. So we are left with 6.

1. 'Honor your father and your mother.'
   
2. 'You shall not murder.'
   
3. 'You shall not commit adultery.'
   
4. 'You shall not steal.'
   
5. 'You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.'
   
6. 'You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall not covet your neighbor's wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor's.'

 

Now 3, 4, and 6 are all basically saying the same thing (remember that in ancient times daughters were considered the property of the father and thus adultery is basically stealing your neighbor's daughter or his wife since adultery is defined as an extramarital affair. They can be summed into "You shall not covet that which is not thine." Stealing being a form of coveting after all.

 

1. 'Honor your father and your mother.'
   
2. 'You shall not murder.'
   
3. 'You shall not covet that which is not thine.'
   
4. 'You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.'

 

Now we are down to 4 commandments, but can we compress this further?

 

Of course we can.

 

Murder too is a form of stealing, you are stealing the life of another, ergo you are coveting it.

 

Now we are down to the 3 commandments.

1. 'Honor your father and your mother.'
   
2. 'You shall not covet that which is not thine.'
   
3. 'You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.'

 

Now the whole false witness thing, what is that? Let's see if we can firm it up a little. "You shall not lie." Okay, that's pretty much a distinct thing. "Honor your father and mother", fine that can be cut short to "Honor your parents" and seems pretty distinct too.

 

Wait

 

Are they distinct? Can't we make it more succinct and boil it down to "Love others as you love yourself", surely you would honor your parents if you love them as yourself, you wouldn't lie to yourself, well for most people, some people seem to like lying to everyone including themselves, and the whole coveting thing would fall in with loving others as you love yourself since you wouldn't covet anymore.

 

So now we have the commandment

LOVE OTHERS AS YOU LOVE YOURSELF.

 

Now, is that really a god given rule? That's for another day.

 

I was backreading. Isn't this from one of George Carlin's routines?