Philosophy Now Forum

Is there any reason for ethical/moral behavior without the existence of a moral authority and the threat of punishment?

I say no.

By ethical/moral behavior I mean choosing to act according to an outside or objective code or law instead of choosing to act according to limited, subjective perspective. For instance, I don't lie to my boss about the "sick" day I want to take because lying is ethically/morally wrong and so, I have to go to work, even though my boss would never know the difference.

My point is, it is only rational to live by the moral imperative "lying is wrong" only if one accepts there is some authority somewhere who will enforce this. (The boss example includes the fact that the boss would not learn of the lie.)

So ultimately, for the free adult, without God, there is no reason to be moral. We can limit our own behavior because we feel like it, or because from a utilitarian perspective it makes sense at a particular time in a particular circumstance, but choosing to accept that there are moral imperatives is irrational unless there is an authority (God) that makes them imperative on all of us.

If your are an atheist, this should be liberating. - you can do what you want.
If you are a believer in God, this should be liberating. - you never have to wonder what is best.

But would you not lose your self-respect a little bit if you lied ?
I feel bad if I do something what I consider bad, even if I can get away with it because there are no witnesses.

And: I think that if you behave badly then in the long run your backbone deteriorates and there is something in your eyes which tells the whole story of your life to someone who looks into them.

I think that I would be stigamtized for the rest of my life if I stole a postage stamp from my employer. I would be disgusted by myself. I would feel like a pig.

I love what you write here Chaz. Not only do we have to make a judgment of what to do, that judgment speaks volumes about our character.

Hi duszek,

One of my friends was telling me a story the other day that relates to your sentiment above. It seems she was at a funeral some time ago and happen to look over at a man across the isle who had fallen asleep during the eulogy. He was so out of it that his head bobbed downward suddenly causing a finger to go up his nose which quickly awakened him with a start. Upon witnessing this my friend started to laugh. She was horrified that she was about to get 'the giggles' at a funeral. She put her head down and started to shake with laughter. Her friend around her mistook her uncontrollably shaking as sobs of grief and started to console her. This made her laugh even harder into her hands...which of course only got her more sympathy. She told me that all she could think between the laughing/sobs was, "Don't console me! I'm a PIG!!"

Then explain why a bitch protects her puppies and will risk her life to do so!

At some point we all realise that we will die and so it is just a cost benefit analysis and the question is not if the bitch is moral but if it made an accurate analysis of the situation.



I have every reason to have an ethical code and to follow it without the threat of hell.

OK tell us what it is.


With atheism anything is possible - even peace! Define peace and this will unravel for you or reveal the closet totalitarian that must exist to have whatever you think peace is.

Indeed. And it is proof positive that there is no objective moral code from the bible or anywhere else. Its all about humans.

hello doesnt anyone read kant anymore

if you are do something or refrain from doing something cause an external authority compels you its not moral behavior



people who seriously say that scare me

they get relationship with god completely backwards

so when you do something good you think to yourself ok id better do it so that god is pleased with me

or when you dont do something bad you think to yourself ok id better not do it cause god will be mad at me and send me to hell

most 5 year olds are more morally advanced than that

have you heard of this thing called empathy

Weren't you the one complaining about Kant a moment ago?

And don't assume that because Chaz said ''threat of hell" I have to assume that position. No one fears hell.

Cyberstone we exist as a species to a great extent because we have a structured society, and a stable society accommodates progress. Co habitation requires some form of moral value system, but societal rules run against one of our primary survival mandates, the one that should and does say to us "take every advantage". Society works because we have gone from wolves to sheep, we are a society of predators who have a propensity to covet and prey on our neighbors, so rules and enforcement are needed to keep us from turning to the wolves we are.

All major religions have a "Ten Commandments" type moral directive laying out the rules of engagement. They are all the same, no lying, no stealing, no killing, no coveting, no sleeping with the neighbors partner. Five common sense rules that stop a society tearing itself apart.

The question of why we adhere to these mandates against our will at times is imo a meld of evolutionary and generationally learnt realities. We have a consciousness that allows us to understand time and death and that understanding is the mother of religion. We contemplated why are we here if we are not here forever, that is why all religions give the faithful an eternal life after death, if you adhere to the teachings, and the moral ones are second only to worship one god. So the moral compass engendered by religions is certainly a factor in behavior.

Generationally learnt is the holistic view of the society on honesty. It is an expectation that except for the percentage of thieves and liars that all societies have carried you can leave an expensive piece of jewelry with a craftsman and they will not deny that you ever gave it to them when you return for it. It is simplistic but true, society works at the most basic level on trust, we have a conscious understanding that complete moral anarchy destroys the society and our species chance of survival.

So a real or invented god coupled with a conscious understanding that social stability promotes the species sees most of us toeing the line, to varying extents.

No one with a brain fears Hell.
But you will not advance an argument by saying something silly.
Millions fear Hell.

This is very nicely stated. I think people who say that there are no objective moral standards don't understand that the objectivity gets determined by the fact that we have a lot in common in virtue of being human beings who live together. Trust undergirds our whole society, just as truth undergirds communication. That is, the presumption must be that we're speaking truths; otherwise, language would be nowhere as useful as it is.

No society in human history (the key word is "human") has ever deemed it morally acceptable to kill your neighbor on a whim, or to rape your neighbor's wife merely because she's appealing to you -- such tenets, if not considered immoral, would undermine the very society these people constituted. Every idiot, that is, can see this, except modern day Liberals. They think that objective morality is a fairytale that only super sophisticates like themselves have outgrown. This is why they tend to be the most evil in our world, because they lack the common sense that homosapiens have had since there were homosapiens. Liberals are modern day cavemen: morally and, hence (for them), intellectually.

So you agree the Islamicist has a right to their objective morality?

As they appear to "... have a lot in common in virtue of being human beings who live together.".