I am trying to keep up with you and TB. I am not succeeding.
Okay...I am going to *talk out loud* here so be patient with me. As usual I have only myself as the *subject*...
My moral code is not a group standard. I believe/adhere to *several* ideas that religious people and society do and do not.
It seems logical and reasonable to me.
If my beliefs are challenged I still am able to hold true to them because they work for me....pretty seamlessly actually. A large portion of my ethics/morals/beliefs *coincide* with religious beliefs as I understand them....I interpret them to fit my belief system. A large portion of my thoughts and behavior come from my own deductions of what is fair and right...from my perspective.
Group standards, I would think, by and large would have religious undertones/implications because whether we like it or not, religion is important to the masses....and it is all most have ever known...how could it NOT be that way?
I'll quit now before I confuse myself further...
Of course...chime in...
Off Topic » in reply to Oh yes, Objectivists are by definition objective.
Well I am completely confused now.
The whole thread (36 posts)
- Prison reform...
- My problem with religion being the basis for ethics
- re: My problem with religion being the basis for ethics
- History shows religion is the world's worst source of "ethics".
- As opposed to what?
- Pre-selected populations with prior behavior requirements are bound to do better. Faith has nothing to do with it.
- Don't worry boys...
- Ah, Dios mio! Sure, you can reduce crime by brainwashing criminals
- Cruel and unusual punishment.
- My problem with religion being the basis for ethics