Let me for the purposes of my argument say that I believe in a goddess named Lain who loves all good things. Never endorses any pain and is all in all a pretty nice goddess. Lets imagine if I didn't believe in my goddess, I would be filled with the scientific truth: "existentialism" and "nihilism" and these ideas were to horribly depress me. If it were to help my consciousness and it would result in me being a better person would it then be ok to truly believe in Lain?
and more importantly would it be ok if all people believed in fake messiah but in exchange the world would be perfect or at least better?
basically the question boils down to: is it moral to use God as a catalyst for good, even though the action in itself is wrong?
(Example: What if it said in the bible: "gays are great! totally give them equal rights!" and that would change the opinion of the masses.)
Major disclaimer: I know that belief in god has always been a cause of horrendous actions, but this is a purely hypothetical thought experiment, so please "go with the flow"
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
Hypothetical or real the belief in a myth for any reason is in itself a very bad thing. Believing a myth to guide ones morals is building false hope. Basis for action or guidance should always be based on facts.
Now thats seeing things from the kantian view. Would you not say killing an innocent to save millions of innocent people would be the right thing to do? Why shouldn't we be more pragmatic then absolutist. It would be therefore a noble lie.
Strawman argument and not worthy of my interest.
how the hell is that a strawman argument, its actually more of a question, do you believe in moral absolutism or pragmatism?
Hmm. To tell a lie to people that want to believe it to improve overall humanity...
It is hard to imagine that, that sort of lie does not turn sour at one point, and it begins to be used for evil. I think such a scenario is so unrealistically hypothetical it is hard to answer.
On its surface, if we can magically have a lie that makes people do only better things that magically never can be twisted to do bad things, (people taking advantage of people's gullibility of that lie for instance.) Then yeah I would take that magical power. It is kind of like if 1 million dollars magically appeared in a suitcase in my room, and magically it would have no ill effects, sure hypothetically I would happily accept that magical 1 million dollars.
But if a suitcase with 1 million dollars cash suddenly appeared in my bedroom after I left it one day in reality, I would be very, VERY nervous and rightfully expect a trap, trick or something else nefarious.
There was time when a behaviour that we see it as immoral today was not an issue until someone in position saw it and declare it.
Mr A was a weak man (just for an example) and he struggled hard to find his food for the day. Than suddenly there was stronger man with an axe, lets name him Mr B who took his food by force. Nothing he could do about it until a fiery dragon came to rescue him and retake his food. Than the fiery dragon declared it that from now on it is forbidden to take other people belonging.
So it was, the fiery dragon became known as the savior of the weak.
But thousand years later people started challenged the fiery dragon ruling, they say "we know better".
I dont get it. Is the dragon suppose to be a stand in for god in this story?
I think the story has to do with "good" being defined as whoever the strongest is
I think the story has to do with "good" being defined as whoever the strongest is
Kind of a moot question; since it doesn't work in the first place: getting people to believe that a magic being is watching their every move/thought don't seem to make them "better people".
If it actually worked, then maybe this would be a conversation worth having.
@Nyarlathotep about zwalja's post (#5)
It's fucking crazy in the first place.
Yeah; that whole dragon thing is either nuts, or it totally went over my head. Not sure which. Is it from Game of Thrones or something?
As a Game of Thrones fan (TV and books,) I can tell you there is nothing even close to that story in GoT so far. At least by my, and most other peoples interpretation of the story so far.
I never quite understood how someone can say scientific truth would depress them or diminish their quality of life... I really feel that this is truly stupid!
I've all my life been brought up without any religious dogma in the background, so as a teenager when religious education was imposed at senior school for a year or two, it came across as having as much credence as Santa Claus but with less fun and good morals.
Please watch some Carl Sagan, Brian Cox or David Attenborough documentaries and realise who you are, what you are and where you are and just how bloody wonderful it is!
Being an atheist simply makes me realise I have one crack at life so I'm going bloody well enjoy it, which so far I am!
I'm happier in thinking I'm essentially an evolved primate clinging onto a rock that revolves around a star in this local universe then believing in made up stories.
being depressed is always meaningless, it only complicates life. But I'm less interested in the comfort of atheism and more interested in the bigger idea that is telling a noble lie (fake Messiah) to make people act more moral. So lets imagine ISIS, would it be right to (somehow) change the Koran so that they would stop their actions? Are "noble lies" acceptable
Religion of any sort is all lies and distortion. Even when the preachers and followers have the best of intentions, a religion inevitably leads people down the slippery slope to misery and holds them back from achieving their potential. I don't see how believing in false messiahs and deities can make the world better. All it's done over the past few thousand years is hold back progress and cause endless horrors.
It's far better to live in the real world and seek the truth. As Yoda (or perhaps Gandalf?) said, "Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free."
I am putting aside all this "demeaning religion" aside but concentrate to what lie can do when it use correctly to certain problem.
My work mate was a heavy smoker who tried to quit for sometime, so I advised him to try hypnotherapy. Few weeks later I noticed that he did not smoke so I asked him when did he quit. His answer?
"I have not had a smoke since 1988".
Telling a lie to make the world a better place is an immoral act that will bite you in the ass. People don't like it when they have been deceive. Would you like it if someone lied to you to make you do moral things in life?
EDIT
Yes but what if this lie results in a better world, does the end not justify the means?
No it doesn't justify the means. Would you like it if someone lied to you and you found out it was a lie?
Well I wouldn't like it, but if lying to me results in a better world, then on a more grand scale it might be the right choice.
If lying is wrong, why would in justifiable to lie for a greater good as you call it.
What if, what if.... What if grasshoppers had guns, birds wouldn't fuck with them!
Morality is subjective, not absolute or objective, that is a cold hard fact. Morality comes from society, whatever that society is.
ISIL would not be affected as it is a political movement disguised in a religious movement. You couldn't subject them to a MORAL LIE and hope for a different outcome.
You don't see the big picture. People that join ISIL or any terrorist group have been morally wronged, disenfranchised, marginalized, or exploited. Political opportunist prey on such people, lure them in with a promise of prosperity (a lie) and then exploit them for THEIR political agenda.
You are proposing to counter a lie with a lie, but you are not offering anything to anyone in reality.
The best way to defeat ISIL is to first eliminate the leaders, destroy their communication and financial structure, and solve the problems of the disenfranchised that join them.
Yes I propose to do the exact same thing but with humanitarian ethics. One big festering lie, pseudo fascism. The story of the grand inquisitor comes into mind; Jesus comes back to earth and performs miracles but the grand inquisitor imprisons Jesus. The grand inquisitor says: "You might be able to abstain from all evil, but why must god punish all of us with free will. Most people will choose earthly bread over moral correctness. The only way to bring about good is to hold people by a leash for the second that people feel insecure they turn into monsters."; So if morality is truly subjective why wouldn't a morality based of the best pragmatic solution be wanted. The last time america decided to destroy a leader without a back up government, it resulted in ISIL. (When Batman did it we saw it as a good solution, he lied to the world to keep bad people in jail, by making the police stronger. Which is per definition fascism)
@vfd
That is all bollocks!
You didn't want a discussion. You wanted everyone to agree with what you think is a wonderful idea. Too bad NO ONE agrees with you. It doesn't matter anyway as your idea will never be realized.
no no, this discussion is me finding reasons against fascism and belief in false deities. And not many are willing to argue logically from the standpoint of fascism (without being horrible Nazis or something), so being the devils advocate makes it clearer as why to support or loath false deities and fascistic thought processes. So know that I am utmost interested in your argumentation and care little to change anyone's opinion.
WTF! So your saying that people who disagree with you are fascist? You have some screwed up thought processes.
Vfd, can you give me a real example of when telling a lie has resulted in a better society?
I agree Freefromgod.
Hitler's, Mussolini's. Moa's, Stalin's, every pope's, every preacher's, L.Ron Hubbard's, Joseph Smith's promises are nothing but garbage. They don't help the people they help the promiser!
I think you're missing the point that religious people do not believe that God is a lie, mostly non-religious people think God is a lie, therefore I do not see how it is wrong to try and be good for something that you see as real.
Pages