# Being a good person without religion



## meepie (Jun 20, 2010)

I believe that being good because you fear a god is doing it for selfish reasons like wanting to get in heaven or doing it out of fear of being reincarnated etc. -- whereas being good for the sake of being a good human without a promise of an afterlife is true goodness not propelled by any reason or reward. Anyone think similarly? I guess I'm a humanist at heart because I believe in the goodness of human beings, and religion just puts down that goodness by saying we are all sinners and making us think we are not capable of being good human beings from the get go. It's almost as if it's an excuse to say, you're a sinner so it's okay if you do "bad" things because that's what this holy text says.


----------



## crimeclub (Nov 7, 2013)

Meepie, as much as it dismays me... I have to disagree with you...

Even religious people not just understand empathy, but they also have a capacity for it. I'm driven by empathy every day, and I still keep my silly religious ways.


----------



## Gemini11 (Feb 22, 2016)

I'm not very religious but I try to be a good person and improve myself anyway. A lot of the teachings of the religions can be used in everday life without having to believe and do everything they say.


----------



## AllTheSame (Mar 19, 2016)

There's no doubt in my mind that's the motivation behind a lot of people deciding to "follow a religious way of life". (I put that in quotes for a reason). I completely understand what you mean Meepie. I happened to be force-fed Catholicism when I was growing up. And I never really understood the whole concept of -- attend mass every Sunday, sin, go to confession, believe you're saved, then rinse, repeat. It always seemed to me even as a child that it was like giving people an excuse to do whatever the *** they wanted to do between 11:00am Sunday until 10:00am the next Sunday. I understand that's not really what Catholicism teaches lmao, but...is it? I mean, in practice, in my experience that's the way a whole, whole lot of Catholics think.

Anyways I wasn't allowed to think for myself as a child, but I'm bringing my kids up a lot differently than I was. And I think for myself now, instead of being a sheeple. And I'm very thankful I'm a recovering Catholic, and that I've managed to change my whole mindset over the years.



meepie said:


> ...being good for the sake of being a good human without a promise of an afterlife is true goodness not propelled by any reason or reward.


Could not agree more.


----------



## TranquilityLane (Mar 22, 2016)

meepie said:


> I believe that being good because you fear a god is doing it for selfish reasons like wanting to get in heaven or doing it out of fear of being reincarnated etc. -- whereas being good for the sake of being a good human without a promise of an afterlife is true goodness not propelled by any reason or reward. Anyone think similarly? I guess I'm a humanist at heart because I believe in the goodness of human beings, and religion just puts down that goodness by saying we are all sinners and making us think we are not capable of being good human beings from the get go. It's almost as if it's an excuse to say, you're a sinner so it's okay if you do "bad" things because that's what this holy text says.


If more humans thought that way, it would make survival much easier, unfortunately though humans just choose to act like feral animals and kick down their fellow man and woman instead of using common sense to survive through helping eachother out.


----------



## minimized (Nov 17, 2007)

Varying jumble of thoughts over the years on the subject...

But yeah. Being "good" because you're afraid of punishment is not goodness (and that definition of goodness is clearly EASILY skewed).

I would rather try to be good as I am and suffer in hell than play these abusive pretend games and I find in myself way more compassion for others than the holier-than-thous have ever offered me, or anyone else that is poor or suffering or some sort of minority. So I'll never trust their capacity for empathy.

But now I should recuse myself. Presently it is not the best time for me to give religion at large the benefit of the doubt.


----------



## M0rbid (Jan 11, 2011)

but animals are innocent beings like children. That's why in the OT animals were used as sacrificial atonement.


----------



## The Starry night (May 23, 2015)

I peronally think its a great way of doing good to other human beings. because it encourages us to do good to others and warns us if we o bad then bad will happen to us as well. Its our intenion that counts.


----------



## meepie (Jun 20, 2010)

crimeclub said:


> Meepie, as much as it dismays me... I have to disagree with you...
> 
> Even religious people not just understand empathy, but they also have a capacity for it. I'm driven by empathy every day, and I still keep my silly religious ways.


I believe there is empathy among religious people, and all people. I am talking about how the empathy was nurtured though. Was the empathy nurtured through fear or was it nurtured through the idea that we have choices in life and we can choose to make the good, benevolent choice even with no consequences. I believe a religious person can be both or more of one. This has to do with growing up in a religious family, particularly one that talks about fearing god.


----------



## lonerroom (May 16, 2015)

crimeclub said:


> Meepie, as much as it dismays me... I have to disagree with you...
> 
> Even religious people not just understand empathy, but they also have a capacity for it. I'm driven by empathy every day, and I still keep my silly religious ways.


 @meepie

I agree with you, and some religious people lack empathy and they think they can get away with being bad because they are in that religion. 
I met a few religious people who were pretty cruel. One person I knew in high school, he claimed he was Christian, but he was so cruel, he was sadistic, he was a horrible friend to me and betrayed me in the worst way and beat me up with his friend in a sears parking lot one day while I waited for my mom. He already had a criminal record before he was 16 too, I later heard from someone else that he enjoyed using people and doing bad things to them. He had also spread lies about me. 
He was 1 of a few religious people I had known who lacked empathy, that made me so confused about religion for a while. 
Then we have to think about those hateful religious people who carry signs that say you are hated for being a certain way. 
I was raised Christian but I became agnostic for a while because I was confused, but then I became Christian again last year.

I have empathy and I am trying my very most hardest to be forgiving of everyone who has hurt me, I am still struggling with anger towards people since I have met so many cruel people all my life.

One thing thats very important about being Christian is forgiveness, and most people don't understand that.


----------



## meepie (Jun 20, 2010)

All humans have the ability to do good things, and bad things -- even the worst things. I guess, I'm just wondering would that goodness be better nurtured without fear, because fear causes shame. Shame leads to lies, manipulation, and the ego being boosted. More trouble comes out of it than anything. If there was openness, emphasis that one has the ability to be good but also bad, and there was a choice, would more people be genuinely doing good things? I think of a Chinese puzzle, the more you pull it, the harder it becomes to take apart, the less you pull on it, and just let it go, the natural instinct is to loosen up. Of course, a select few people are born without empathy like sociopaths and psychopaths.


----------



## Nimander (Feb 17, 2016)

minimized said:


> I would rather try to be good as I am and suffer in hell than play these abusive pretend games and I find in myself way more compassion for others than the holier-than-thous have ever offered me, or anyone else that is poor or suffering or some sort of minority. So I'll never trust their capacity for empathy.


I like your way of thinking, but you have it the other way around.

To have compassion, you have to go through hell first.


----------



## meepie (Jun 20, 2010)

Gemini11 said:


> I'm not very religious but I try to be a good person and improve myself anyway. A lot of the teachings of the religions can be used in everday life without having to believe and do everything they say.


I agree, religion has some good things, but if we can remove the "if you don't follow this you will face consequences" portion and let people choose, have freewill, will people be more susceptible to it?


----------



## minimized (Nov 17, 2007)

Nimander said:


> I like your way of thinking, but you have it the other way around.
> 
> To have compassion, you have to go through hell first.


I've certainly been through hell, so it was way too easy for me to understand. In this world, it's a weakness...

Kind of a funny concept when a benevolent deity is overlaid on top of it...

But on the other hand, the incessant awfulness from the other side. If only it were possible to hold up a mirror to their behavior and make them understand. Under their thumb, it becomes a group identifier to be used as a weapon. And somehow they threatened me constantly with hell. The kind of people who push for war, think it's okay to bomb civilians, pass laws that legitimize discrimination, turn people back into the maw of war, victimize the poor and the disabled? They think they can scare me? This is their country, as they like to claim, founded on their principles, and yet they complain about it ad nauseum and think it's better to go back to some golden, illusional past than learn anything new. Of course, there's plenty of this throughout the history of organized religion, but still, in the 21st century, they can't seem to realize how much they are a product of their own minds. It's so frustrating. This world does not have to be as horrific as make it.

I always wondered what would happen to someone like me if I wasn't in this time and this place, and I'm confident that it's not something speakable in decent company.


----------



## TheInvisibleHand (Sep 5, 2015)

meepie said:


> I agree, religion has some good things, but if we can remove the *"if you don't follow this you will face consequences"*


Why do you care about this ? If someone does good things because he fears God why do you make that as some sort of bad selfish thing ?Maybe when you get a sociopath/psychopath who destroys your life you will stop caring about "selfish" good things someone does for his own ego .


----------



## vsaxena (Apr 17, 2015)

You know what, Meeps? I do good things for one and only one reason: I WANT A COOKIE!










Jokes aside, I very strongly believe in shame and hate the fact that we live in a society where people are literally encouraged to not feel any remorse or stigma for the immoral things they do. In my opinion, a society like this fosters irresponsibility and cultural decay.

All that said, I think there is a big difference between being religious and being a religious fanatic. Most Christians I have encountered seemed like pretty awesome and down-to-Earth people. Honestly, the ones who I tend to dislike -- or who gave off a negative vibe -- were usually the atheists and other such assorted heathens, lol.

P.S. - I myself am agnostic, but I got nothing but love for the Christian religion.


----------



## Darktower776 (Aug 16, 2013)

I can see your point, meepie, but I think that if people are still doing good and being a reasonably good person then it shouldn't matter too much about the WHY. It's like if several different people are helping to feed homeless people and one is doing simply because it makes him feel better about himself and another is doing it to tell friends about it. 

I mean I don't agree with doing charity or volunteer work or other good deeds in order to brag about it but at the end of the day, if they take it seriously, they are still helping other people or animals or children etc. And charity work is usually selfishly motivated at least a little bit because if often makes the person doing it feel better about themselves. 

And about being a good person in general I don't think that the reason is all that important either or that one reason makes someone a "better" person than another. As long as that person is trying their best and being a good person to others, that should matter the most. However I don't agree with blindly following religion either. For the record I'm not all that religious.


----------



## nubly (Nov 2, 2006)

Being a good person has nothing to do with religion as religious people can be bad people too.


----------



## apx24 (Jan 31, 2012)

Religious people aren't good. They do good things for purely selfish reasons.


----------



## Gemini11 (Feb 22, 2016)

meepie said:


> I agree, religion has some good things, but if we can remove the "if you don't follow this you will face consequences" portion and let people choose, have freewill, will people be more susceptible to it?


I just feel like it's man made to control people because not everyone is as naturally virtuous as us&#128522; The facing consequences is how they guilt people into joining. In the past many people were susceptible to it but with all the hypocrisy from the church leaders people just aren't as believing anymore.


----------



## sajs (Jan 3, 2015)

I think that even if it is selfish what matters is the end result. I mean, I don't give a **** if someone has the intention to go to heaven or does it for fear, it is their problem. But I think that it is more valuable if someone does it for no personal gain (although one might say that feeling good about themselves is a personal gain, so ... who knows?)

As the saying goes

"There are two ways of spreading light. To be the candle or the mirror that reflects it"


----------



## ugh1979 (Aug 27, 2010)

meepie said:


> I believe that being good because you fear a god is doing it for selfish reasons like wanting to get in heaven or doing it out of fear of being reincarnated etc. -- whereas being good for the sake of being a good human without a promise of an afterlife is true goodness not propelled by any reason or reward. Anyone think similarly?


Indeed. You can know someone who isn't religious doing good has a greater chance of doing it for purely altruistic reasons than someone who is religious, since that latter has a world view which allegedly gives them a huge reward for such action after they die.

Who's the better person? Someone who does good for no reward, or someone who is believes they are getting a big pay day for doing so?



> I guess I'm a humanist at heart because I believe in the goodness of human beings, and religion just puts down that goodness by saying we are all sinners and making us think we are not capable of being good human beings from the get go.


First of all, humanism doesn't directly infer that humans are good, but it is true that most humans arguably are, so the belief is compatible with humanism. 

Religions which state we are born 'bad' are immoral IMO and they are of course doing so with the intention of offering what are in fact good people the alleged only way of being so by following religious doctrine.

It doesn't make sense for religions to say people can be good without them. Their lies become more obvious to more people every day though thankfully.



> It's almost as if it's an excuse to say, you're a sinner so it's okay if you do "bad" things because that's what this holy text says.


There may be cases where because someone is repeatedly told they are born 'bad' they do more bad things, where as if they are brought up being told they can be good naturally without having to jump through various religious hoops they may be a better person.


----------



## ugh1979 (Aug 27, 2010)

Gemini11 said:


> I'm not very religious but I try to be a good person and improve myself anyway. A lot of the teachings of the religions can be used in everday life without having to believe and do everything they say.


Said teachings are just basic human morality that have existed far longer than religions.

Religions high jacked morality, and often added in some perverse additions.


----------



## ugh1979 (Aug 27, 2010)

AllTheSame said:


> There's no doubt in my mind that's the motivation behind a lot of people deciding to "follow a religious way of life". (I put that in quotes for a reason). I completely understand what you mean Meepie. I happened to be force-fed Catholicism when I was growing up. And I never really understood the whole concept of -- attend mass every Sunday, sin, go to confession, believe you're saved, then rinse, repeat. It always seemed to me even as a child that it was like giving people an excuse to do whatever the *** they wanted to do between 11:00am Sunday until 10:00am the next Sunday. I understand that's not really what Catholicism teaches lmao, but...is it? I mean, in practice, in my experience that's the way a whole, whole lot of Catholics think.
> 
> Anyways I wasn't allowed to think for myself as a child, but I'm bringing my kids up a lot differently than I was. And I think for myself now, instead of being a sheeple. And I'm very thankful I'm a recovering Catholic, and that I've managed to change my whole mindset over the years.
> 
> Could not agree more.


Indeed I think that's a particular problem in Catholicism. There are millions of Catholic criminals who undoubtedly believe that they will go to heaven since all they have to do is renounce their sins before they die.

That's really not a good modal for promoting good behaviour.


----------



## ugh1979 (Aug 27, 2010)

Does anyone else agree that Apoc Revolution shouldn't post much of what they have said in this forum? (i.e. the agnostic and atheist support forum)

The religious proselytism they express is against the rules, and the belief that 'everyone is a born sinner' etc is the basis for other users of this forums mental health issues, so shouldn't be tolerated here.

I of course have no problem with such a discussion in the religious/agnostic/atheist _discussion _forum, but Apoc Revolution isn't supporting any agnostic/atheists by pushing fundamentalist religious beliefs here.

The OP was very valid, as it's a good subject to learn about for people who may have been brainwashed by religion on it and want to know about being good without religion, so Apoc Revolutions contributions aim to undermine that, so should be banned in this support forum.

I've reported it and hopefully the mods will do something about it.

[staff edit] Posts have been deleted accordingly


----------



## Teanah (Apr 3, 2016)

I agree completely ugh. It's not really what I'd expect to see in the atheist/agnostic support forum. 

There is a separate forum for debate and I really wish they'd take their posts about the bible and god's judgement over there instead.


----------



## Apoc Revolution (Dec 2, 2013)

_I ̼didn't no͙t̄icḙ tͤhi̯s̲̄ ͛̑w̓͒as th͖e Agnosͯtic/Athe̾ist ᷇forum until͖̎ after I ha̰d̤᷿ ͐al̓rea̜dy ̢͛pos̏teͣd. I͆t ̲bec̕â̛me such an ͗int͏eres᷁ti̭ng d̴᷄iscus̗̯s͋ion,̥ tͥhaṭ I͆ ̆jus᷄t cou̢ld̵᷊n't s̃t᷾opͮ.̹ I̷'ll a̗d̆mitͮ ̘tha᷇̓t᷉ was ᷁ͣmy fȧult᷇ ̢᷁an̲᷅̍͝d I apologise for t̸hat. Feͥel f̙̉r͗ee to d̻e̻l̻e̻t̻e̻ mÿ po̠sts ö̜̏r mov̔e͕ it iͯnto the͆ Agnos̷tici̸̥sm/A̫͜the̠ism/R̯eligi̷on forum, I d̟͎᷁̊͞ỏ͍n't care͜ͅ.

@ugͅh1᷂979; ͯ̿I could choose ̩ͦ̍to an̚sͪw̦er y͟our ͈qu̝estions, ͥb͌ut I ̰ͥc͛͏an'᷄ẗ̄ con̒t̻iͨn̉ue in t̊hi͐̄s̰ th̺read._

[staff edit] Posts have been deleted accordingly


----------



## SplendidBob (May 28, 2014)

I would consider myself to be somewhat utilitarian, so more or less it wouldn't matter to me _why_ someone does good acts, so long as they do them. I don't consider religion a prerequisite for doing good acts of course, and rather unsurprisingly I would consider being more utilitarian to likely result in an individual doing more "good" than any other moral leaning 

The issue here though is how you are defining "goodness". Is a good act determined by the consequences of an individuals actions, or their intent. To me I rather favour the former, so if an individual who is going around hurting people "finds god" and stops going around hurting people then that is an unequivocal improvement. I don't really much care if the individual is being "truly good" (whatever the hell that is), only that their actions are causing less harm (or providing more benefits) than they were previously.

That also isn't to say that religion acts as a force for more good than harm _overall_ (I need to say this lest people get the wrong idea). I suspect in fact it does more harm than good, but on an individual level it doesn't matter at all what _reason_ the person has for being good. Their acts aren't any less good if those good acts are inspired by a fiction.


----------



## meepie (Jun 20, 2010)

Thanks for the people on their input. I like how some people here have told me that the intention to do good things doesn't matter. You are right, in the end of the day if being religious makes a person contribute good things to the world, then so be it regardless of the reason why they are doing it. Perhaps Im viewing the world in a linear manner. I keep forgetting whenever I go on a tangent of thought, the world is not linear, not all people are the same and it's more of a random pattern. That's why religion exists for this purpose. Some people need that promise of a reward, some people don't, at the end of the day, neither one is better, but the fact that people are capable of doing good things is all that matters -- and that goes back to my original belief that all humans are capable of doing goof and that's what I want to believe in. Thanks @splendidbob, @Darktower776.


----------



## meepie (Jun 20, 2010)

Also yeah @Apoc Revolution I was looking for some insight and support from fellow secular humanists/atheists/agnostics, not a debate.


----------



## meepie (Jun 20, 2010)

I'd like to say one more thing, this topic by quoting Rousseau who said "Man is good, but men are wicked" which is why I am against organized religion in general. The idea that when people come together to do good things, the value of that goodness is lost because it's more about the religion not the result of the religion.


----------



## sarafinanickelbocker (May 16, 2010)

meepie said:


> I believe that being good because you fear a god is doing it for selfish reasons like wanting to get in heaven or doing it out of fear of being reincarnated etc. -- whereas being good for the sake of being a good human without a promise of an afterlife is true goodness not propelled by any reason or reward. Anyone think similarly? I guess I'm a humanist at heart because I believe in the goodness of human beings, and religion just puts down that goodness by saying we are all sinners and making us think we are not capable of being good human beings from the get go. It's almost as if it's an excuse to say, you're a sinner so it's okay if you do "bad" things because that's what this holy text says.


Whatever the case. I just want people to be good to each other and realize that it is a good thing despite their motivation.

Get on it folks! *snaps fingers*


----------



## ugh1979 (Aug 27, 2010)

Apoc Revolution said:


> I ̼didn't no͙t̄icḙ tͤhi̯s̲̄ ͛̑w̓͒as th͖e Agnosͯtic/Athe̾ist ᷇forum until͖̎ after I ha̰d̤᷿ ͐al̓rea̜dy ̢͛pos̏teͣd. I͆t ̲bec̕â̛me such an ͗int͏eres᷁ti̭ng d̴᷄iscus̗̯s͋ion,̥ tͥhaṭ I͆ ̆jus᷄t cou̢ld̵᷊n't s̃t᷾opͮ.̹ I̷'ll a̗d̆mitͮ ̘tha᷇̓t᷉ was ᷁ͣmy fȧult᷇ ̢᷁an̲᷅̍͝d I apologise for t̸hat. Feͥel f̙̉r͗ee to d̻e̻l̻e̻t̻e̻ mÿ po̠sts ö̜̏r mov̔e͕ it iͯnto the͆ Agnos̷tici̸̥sm/A̫͜the̠ism/R̯eligi̷on forum, I d̟͎᷁̊͞ỏ͍n't care͜ͅ.
> 
> @ugͅh1᷂979; ͯ̿I could choose ̩ͦ̍to an̚sͪw̦er y͟our ͈qu̝estions, ͥb͌ut I ̰ͥc͛͏an'᷄ẗ̄ con̒t̻iͨn̉ue in t̊hi͐̄s̰ th̺read.


Apology accepted. 

I'll repeat some of my questions to you at a suitable time and place in future in the religious/agnostic/atheist discussion forum, as you seem to be revealing some interesting discussion points on why you are the way you are.


----------



## coeur_brise (Oct 7, 2004)

Religion itself doesn't make you a "good" person. It's practicing what it preaches, the good stuff that does. As whole, I don't think religion has as much weight as to how you were raised to treat other people. It's just a guideline, a way of life you can either choose or reject. Add the divine/spirituality aspect, then you've got a religion. 

Does it shape the way you think? In ways, but it engrains beliefs much more than behavior. Christianity says to give money to the church, but I don't because I don't really want to, the Church has enough money. Give money to the poor, that's religion too but not very many people do that on a regular basis. Even if they do, whether it's for religious reasons or not should be their own to decide. 

I don't personally judge someone's capability to empathize based on their own beliefs because I know it has little to do with how they behave. I just don't believe that because crazy fundamentalist zealots exist, they must all be crazy fundamentalist zealots. That's unfair to the ones that are in the middle of the belief spectrum. If you do something good in the name of religion, that's great. If you do good for goodness sake, that's also great.


----------



## TheGuardian (Jun 20, 2015)

Being good is a choice, it has NOTHING to do with religion. But it can also depend on your personality and how you were raised. Although not always, i have an old friend who grew up in a ****ty environment and yet she somehow turned out super caring/nice. I am non-religious and yet i would say i'm a good person. I wont say 100% but i am nice/respectful to strangers.


----------



## nothing else (Oct 27, 2013)

The way I see it is that you can be a good person without religion. If you tell thousands of people to read the Bible, not all of them will have better moral character than somebody who does not. Some people will still lack empathy after reading the Bible (in fact several serial killers are identified as Christian). So in this sense, I think morals are more determined by the individual and not their religious affiliation.


----------



## JustALonelyHeart (Nov 20, 2015)

It does matter why you are doing good.If you do it for fear of an invisible aka non existent God, or for hopes of a reward or simply for "following Jesus and being a good christian" then I think that really nulifies the result.People feel WHY you are doing it, they feel if you don't help for being genuine.When you help because you want people to know you care and you have their happiness in your consideration, and it makes you feel good to help and see people happy, it matters more than anything.That is really genuine and selfless.
Religion just doesn't do that.All religious people I met were being good either for fear of a God, or because they thought beliving in that God and doing good deeds would grant them favors, or were being good for simply selfish and personal reasons or to recruit more people into that religion, or they were being good because they "believe in God and want to be like Jesus".
Personally I think religion is corrupt, and a waste of everyone's time.


----------



## Furiosa (Jun 2, 2015)

I can totally see where you are coming from. When you stop and look at it that way, religious people who do good are doing it for selfish reasons and self gain. They do so to please God, so they go to heaven, are reincarnated, and so on. They aren't doing so just because they want to. You could also say that their actions are a result of fear, if they don't lead a good life then they will be punished by going to hell.

With all being said though, I don't personally see that as such a negative thing. The world can be a pretty ****ty place when you stop and think about it, so as long as there are people out there doing good, what ever their reasons to do so, this can't be a bad thing for society really.


----------



## Humesday (Mar 6, 2016)

It's so absurd to me to intimidate people into being good people via threats of hellfire. It's absurd because that kind of fear can and has lead to self-judgment, self-flagellation, etc. If you're cultivating self-judgment, then you're likely cultivating judgment for others, thus diminishing your sense of compassion. Judgmental attitudes cut both ways. So, ironically, threats of hellfire can lead to people being less "good," because they're more likely to end up being mired in base judgmentalism. Compassion and equanimity helps cut through all that. If you're cultivating compassion for yourself, and likely, therefore, others, or vice versa, you've provided yourself with a very important tool for weighing moral problems. So, it seems to me that threats of hellfire impede progress to cultivating compassion. A system that impedes such cultivation impedes moral evolution. So, religions that rely on such threats are often counterproductive to moral evolution. 

Also, I think intention does matter for many moral considerations. I say this because, in order to be moral, for many of us, it's important to cultivate emotions and an emotional or intentional state (equanimity, compassion, and others) that will make such moral deliberation less prone to error. If you have cultivated your sense of compassion and equanimity, for instance, then you're better equipped to weigh other people's pain in your everyday life by being calm-minded and cognizant to other people's pain via cultivated sympathy. By doing this, you're cultivating emotions that lead to an intentional state more amenable to doing good. Your emotional state will, hopefully, manifest readily as intention to do good. If you have little compassion and equanimity, however, your amygdala is probably bigger, and, so, you're more likely to engage in tribal thinking via a greater fight-or-flight response, which can obviously diminish compassion via in-group-out-group dynamics. This could obviously skew one's moral deliberations. 

So, if you intend to be a good person who isn't misled by moral systems, rationalizations, etc., that might lead you to foolhardy ends, then you're going to want to cultivate an intentional state that will provide a sort of check-and-balance relation with such moral deliberations. If you just focus on consequences and think intention doesn't matter, then I think you're more likely to neglect the cultivation of an intentional state necessary for accurate and wise moral deliberations in everyday life. Seeing someone's intention as important for accurate and wise moral deliberations, will allow you to seek to cultivate those intentions in others. You'll recognize that state of mind in others. And your own cultivated emotional state will lead to, hopefully, seeking to enhance such cultivation in others, thus boosting other people's ability to engage in wise moral deliberations. 

To be sure, on the flip side, you also want to be concerned with the consequences of your actions on others. An emotional state more amenable to wisdom, compassion, equanimity, etc., can get you part of the way there. But just having that state is a bit blind. I think it's important to also have a good system of moral deliberation with an eye toward consequences. So, I think intention, as well as consequences, matter for wise moral deliberation.


----------



## fredbloggs02 (Dec 14, 2009)

The fact that virtue leads to heaven and vice to hell doesn't mean that these are a person's motives. They might just be safeguards. The belief they are motives also discounts the fact that for many belief is not absolute certainty, but rather like the taut string of a bow or lyre - a straining tension of doubt and conviction. There is a prayer by the Sufi mystic Rabia:

"Oh God,
if I worship Thee in fear 
of Hell, burn me in hell; 
and if I worship Thee in hope of
Paradise, exclude me from 
Paradise; but if I worship Thee
for Thine own sake, withhold not
Thine everlasting beauty."

Actually this is a quite common sentiment. Even some of the most devoutly religious have doubts, yet still adhere to virtue. There is a very moving account of this in Therese of Liseux's autobiography, where, while doubting the afterlife, she expresses sentiments like Rabia's. For many believers it matters a great deal that virtue is chosen rather than wrung or induced.


----------



## ugh1979 (Aug 27, 2010)

fredbloggs02 said:


> The fact that virtue leads to heaven and vice to hell doesn't mean that these are a person's motives. They might just be safeguards. The belief they are motives also discounts the fact that for many belief is not absolute certainty, but rather like the taut string of a bow or lyre - a straining tension of doubt and conviction. There is a prayer by the Sufi mystic Rabia:
> 
> "Oh God,
> if I worship Thee in fear
> ...


Indeed when it's something like religion which has scant if any evidence for its validity it's no wonder many of its believers struggle to be sure of their convictions. I'm also sure cognitive dissonance is rife among the faithful, especially in this day and age.

You may well we right that religious people do good things for altruistic reasons, but there is still the element that they believe there is a deity watching them and if they don't do good they will be punished. As I said earlier, it makes it difficult to know how honest, selfless etc religious people are truly being when they are being good. Of course anyone could have ulterior motives for their behaviour, but that is a rather large concerning one.


----------



## gopherinferno (Apr 7, 2009)

It's kinda like the law. If there weren't laws that punish people for stealing and killing and whatever, some people might be marauding evil dbags. But a lot of people wouldn't do stuff like that no matter what, because they just aren't dicks. 

A lot of people need religion because the concept of there not being any certain meaning or order in the universe is absolutely terrifying and depressing. I think it's a relief and kinda hilarious.


----------



## ugh1979 (Aug 27, 2010)

gopherinferno said:


> It's kinda like the law. If there weren't laws that punish people for stealing and killing and whatever, some people might be marauding evil dbags. But a lot of people wouldn't do stuff like that no matter what, because they just aren't dicks.
> 
> A lot of people need religion because the concept of there not being any certain meaning or order in the universe is absolutely terrifying and depressing. I think it's a relief and kinda hilarious.


Other than the fact as you correctly said that people in general are well behaved (since in general people are 'good/moral'), it's not just official laws that usually keep people from committing serious crimes. There is also the fact that society typically shuns people who do behave in such a way. The threat of ostracisation from ones society is as old as social is surely at least millions of years old, so it's no wonder such behaviour it's typically coded into our genes and enduring culture as something that is 'wrong'.


----------



## monolo (Nov 18, 2015)

gopherinferno said:


> A lot of people need religion because the concept of there not being any certain meaning or order in the universe is absolutely terrifying and depressing.


Gotta agree with this. People who are religious often take comfort in the fact that there is a greater meaning or purpose to something bad that happens, that an afterlife will provide justify the difficulties/injustices in this life. I guess if that helps people cope with life and to be happy, why not.


----------

