Is there true justice within atheism?

For the person who does not believe there will be any judgment outside of this life, there are only two things which keeps order: conscience and civil/government order.  For this person, if you do something morally wrong and do not get caught then you can get away with it.  At first, this seems appealing when looking at our own wrong doings.  "I will never face responsibility for ----!"

The problem is that this means people who get away with murder, rape, incest, etc. will never be judged in a just fashion.  They will get away free without any form of consequence.  Often times, there will be nothing but temporal social justice and for many, relative morality.  Is there any justice in this?

We could get into what Christians believe regarding this, but I'd prefer the discussion deal more with the atheist's belief in justice for simplicity's sake.

Your presentation of the incentives behind the notion of justice for non-theists is lacking.

Morals at their basic level become common sense for everyone as they grow up, because they see and observe the world around them, they observe society and can see on what principles it can flourish and prosper. They see what actions bring about negative effects and what actions bring about positive effects and also what causes pleasant feelings. And here a theist would say that satisfaction from retalliation is also a pleasant feeling. But we see that theists are also prone to this confusion that this lacking moral guide can create. Therefore, no divine moral guidance makes a significant difference in defining the fine details.

Because in the end, like Genetic_Code had once mentioned, all religious morals are connected to humanitarian principles. And as their name correctly implies they are standards than man himself has (and can) perceive and live by, and no divine inspiration is the exclusive source for any of them.

And of course my answer is complete with my opinion about the connection of religion and morality in this other thread we have here. :D

EDIT: Also to me a simple rule is "if I start killing, and expect it to be acceptable, then others will kill as well and that puts my life at risk too". The same goes for other wrong actions. And the train of thought in the quotes does not cross the mind at all. I think its a very impulsive one. And thats why I believe its strong.

Often times, there will be nothing but temporal social justice and for many, relative morality. Is there any justice in this?mindstorm

And also, arguments aside, I personally learnt whats right and wrong through what my parents taught me. With their own way the instilled inside me basic morals, but never connected it to our Christian faith.

Morals can be conveyed in many ways other than religion.

And sure again a theist would say that some (actually many) parents are not capable of doing that. So what? Just as the effort to systematise morals was once the Bible, now its the constitution of a country and its laws. In the first you have God as the supreme order and in the second you have abstract notions not connected to something personified.

So is it in the end a comparison of authorities one follows? Yes.

Your presentation of the incentives behind the notion of justice for non-theists is lacking.

Morals at their basic level become common sense for everyone as they grow up, because they see and observe the world around them, they observe society and can see on what principles it can flourish and prosper. They see what actions bring about negative effects and what actions bring about positive effects and also what causes pleasant feelings. And here a theist would say that satisfaction from retalliation is also a pleasant feeling. But we see that theists are also prone to this confusion that this lacking moral guide can create. Therefore, no divine moral guidance makes a significant difference in defining the fine details.

Yes and No.  I do believe there is "divine moral guidance" within all of us which comes from God.

Because in the end, like Genetic_Code had once mentioned, all religious morals are connected to humanitarian principles. And as their name correctly implies they are standards than man himself has (and can) perceive and live by, and no divine inspiration is the exclusive source for any of them.

And of course my answer is complete with my opinion about the connection of religion and morality in this other thread we have here. :D

EDIT: Also to me a simple rule is "if I start killing, and expect it to be acceptable, then others will kill as well and that puts my life at risk too". The same goes for other wrong actions. And the train of thought in the quotes does not cross the mind at all. I think its a very impulsive one. And thats why I believe its strong.

Teenaged

I have no major disagreements (though I believe God has revealed morality to all of us through natural revelation).

However, I still have not had my main question answered, do you believe that if a person is not caught for a horrible act, that it is fine for this person to get away free?

Also, would not a belief in a final judgment cause people, in some sense, act better?

[quote="mindstorm"]Often times, there will be nothing but temporal social justice and for many, relative morality. Is there any justice in this?ChiliDragon

Someone is punished for a horrible deed.

And also, arguments aside, I personally learnt whats right and wrong through what my parents taught me. With their own way the instilled inside me basic morals, but never connected it to our Christian faith.

Morals can be conveyed in many ways other than religion.

And sure again a theist would say that some (actually many) parents are not capable of doing that. So what? Just as the effort to systematise morals was once the Bible, now its the constitution of a country and its laws. In the first you have God as the supreme order and in the second you have abstract notions not connected to something personified.

So is it in the end a comparison of authorities one follows? Yes.

Teenaged

I'm not trying to say there is no morality outside of Christianity.  I believe some of the most moral people in the world can be atheists.  I'm just asking if people like Hitler gets away without true punishment for his crimes?

I have no major disagreements (though I believe God has revealed morality to all of us through natural revelation).

However, I still have not had my main question answered, do you believe that if a person is not caught for a horrible act, that it is fine for this person to get away free?

Also, would not a belief in a final judgment cause people, in some sense, at better?

mindstorm

About this: different motivations work under different conditions and for different people. Although neither of the two ways (being good for humanitarian purposes and being good for the sake of a final judgment) are wrong in my opinion. Both can equally create wonderful characters.

This is how I see it: when you have centuries of human evolution based on the fear of punishment after death, its natural that this imminent change (moral way of life without religion and fear of punishment after death) wont be always 100% successful which gives the wrong impression that the approach is not as effective as the one you advocate (having the fear of punishment after death). Some habits die hard. That doesnt mean they should not die or that the alternative is wrong because it hasnt yet managed to show its potential compared to the habit. Although I do think it has shown its potential with the examples of some mostly-secualr European countries.

[QUOTE="ChiliDragon"][quote="mindstorm"]Often times, there will be nothing but temporal social justice and for many, relative morality. Is there any justice in this?mindstorm

I'm not trying to say there is no morality outside of Christianity.  I believe some of the most moral people in the world can be atheists.  I'm just asking if people like Hitler gets away without true punishment for his crimes?

mindstorm

Just to please our need for revenge?

Sorry if I am reading to much in to what you say but I cant help it. =/

Interesting. Some of the oldest preserved laws from the Viking time don't focus on punishing the criminal but in compensating the victim, to restore their honor, and the criminal was the one to did so. So if you murdered a man, you would pay his family a sum of money that was based on the man's profession and social rank. Once the fine was paid in full, justice had been served in their minds. But you say that justice is impossible without punishment?ChiliDragon

In regard to that, there is much that I could say. One difference between the theist and atheist is the notion of life after death.  Those who believe there is no life after death believes our actions have no lasting effects.  As a result, there is going to be a different degree of justice needed to make an action right between the two individuals.

If our bad deeds only do a small about of damage then there only needs to be a small amount of judgment.  If our deeds are eternal, then so is our judgment.

I suppose I will add to my definition of justice "someone is punished for a horrible deed or makes up for that deed." :P

[QUOTE="mindstorm"]

I'm not trying to say there is no morality outside of Christianity.  I believe some of the most moral people in the world can be atheists.  I'm just asking if people like Hitler gets away without true punishment for his crimes?

Teenaged

Just to please our need for revenge?

Sorry if I am reading to much in to what you say but I cant help it. =/

Not as a sense of revenge but as a sense of making things right.  Doing good should be rewarded and doing evil should be punished.

But with the notion of damnation, it possibly could be considered revenge if there was no way to become "out of dept" (aka salvation). I'm not saying that is my belief though.

First off, one difference between the theist and atheist is the notion of life after death. Those who believe there is no life after death believes our actions have no lasting effects. As a result, there is going to be a different degree of justice needed to make an action right between the two individuals.mindstorm

[QUOTE="mindstorm"]First off, one difference between the theist and atheist is the notion of life after death. Those who believe there is no life after death believes our actions have no lasting effects. As a result, there is going to be a different degree of justice needed to make an action right between the two individuals.ChiliDragon

Yes, but not for the person who does the deed.

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]So, (eternal) damnation after death is a notion we should accept in order to comfort our desire to see the ones we despise suffer immensely?

Just to please our need for revenge?

Sorry if I am reading to much in to what you say but I cant help it. =/

mindstorm

Not as a sense of revenge but as a sense of making things right.  Doing good should be rewarded and doing evil should be punished.

But with the notion of damnation, it possibly could be considered revenge if there was no way to become "out of dept" (aka salvation). I'm not saying that is my belief though.

The equal? More? In accordance to our imulse feelings towards the wrong-doer? Should punishment be of that nature to begin with? Should it not be corrective and not retributive?

Yes, but not for the person who does the deed.

mindstorm

I (either if I was atheist or now as an agnostic) sure do care.

[QUOTE="mindstorm"]The consequences of our actions live on long after the deed has been done... and they ripple and spread. And they can last for generations.ChiliDragon

[QUOTE="ChiliDragon"][QUOTE="mindstorm"]The consequences of our actions live on long after the deed has been done... and they ripple and spread. And they can last for generations.ChiliDragon

Which is just an unfounded assumption.

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

Your presentation of the incentives behind the notion of justice for non-theists is lacking.

Morals at their basic level become common sense for everyone as they grow up, because they see and observe the world around them, they observe society and can see on what principles it can flourish and prosper. They see what actions bring about negative effects and what actions bring about positive effects and also what causes pleasant feelings. And here a theist would say that satisfaction from retalliation is also a pleasant feeling. But we see that theists are also prone to this confusion that this lacking moral guide can create. Therefore, no divine moral guidance makes a significant difference in defining the fine details.

Yes and No. I do believe there is "divine moral guidance" within all of us which comes from God.

Because in the end, like Genetic_Code had once mentioned, all religious morals are connected to humanitarian principles. And as their name correctly implies they are standards than man himself has (and can) perceive and live by, and no divine inspiration is the exclusive source for any of them.

And of course my answer is complete with my opinion about the connection of religion and morality in this other thread we have here. :D

EDIT: Also to me a simple rule is "if I start killing, and expect it to be acceptable, then others will kill as well and that puts my life at risk too". The same goes for other wrong actions. And the train of thought in the quotes does not cross the mind at all. I think its a very impulsive one. And thats why I believe its strong.

mindstorm

I have no major disagreements (though I believe God has revealed morality to all of us through natural revelation).

However, I still have not had my main question answered, do you believe that if a person is not caught for a horrible act, that it is fine for this person to get away free?

Also, would not a belief in a final judgment cause people, in some sense, act better?

To your last comment, i read a stat from this board saying that 70% of the crims in US prisions are christian. How do you view that?THUMPTABLE

[QUOTE="THUMPTABLE"]
To your last comment, i read a stat from this board saying that 70% of the crims in US prisions are christian. How do you view that?Teenaged

[QUOTE="THUMPTABLE"]
To your last comment, i read a stat from this board saying that 70% of the crims in US prisions are christian. How do you view that?Teenaged

Considering atheism isn't a dogmatic set of beliefs, and nothing within the belief itself outlines rules of "justice," I don't understand where this question arises from. "Justice" is a matter of community preservation. I'd like to see a definition of "justice" from you mindstorm.

I guess mindstorm implies that a non-theist only cares for what happens in their life-span only.

Which is just an unfounded assumption.

Teenaged

Not remotely, I'm simply stating that a person who dies cannot be punished for his crimes....

To your last comment, i read a stat from this board saying that 70% of the crims in US prisions are christian. How do you view that?THUMPTABLE

I've never stated that Christians were morally superior.  

Considering atheism isn't a dogmatic set of beliefs, and nothing within the belief itself outlines rules of "justice," I don't understand where this question arises from. "Justice" is a matter of community preservation. I'd like to see a definition of "justice" from you mindstorm.

foxhound_fox

I'm simply saying that if a person has done something horrible and gets away with it, is it just that he never has to answer for his actions?

I'm simply saying that if a person has done something horrible and gets away with it, is it just that he never has to answer for his actions?mindstorm

For the person who does not believe there will be any judgment outside of this life, there are only two things which keeps order: conscience and civil/government order. For this person, if you do something morally wrong and do not get caught then you can get away with it. At first, this seems appealing when looking at our own wrong doings. "I will never face responsibility for ----!"mindstorm

An attitude like that would probably lead to increasingly worse crimes. There's something wrong if the only reason you won't go on a killing spree is because you believe you'll burn in hell for it. Did you murder anyone you wanted before you became a christian?

The problem is that this means people who get away with murder, rape, incest, etc. will never be judged in a just fashion. They will get away free without any form of consequence.Often times, there will be nothing but temporal social justice and for many, relative morality. Is there any justice in this?

mindstorm

You cannot make a concrete definition of what's just and then ask what justice is.The consequence that they'd face for doing a horrible act like rape is the effect it'll have on the environment around them. Even if we eliminate the possibility of the rapist feeling any remorse whatsoever, the news of the rape will spread like wildfire in the coming weeks. I imagine the whole city would be living in fear the entire time; such as women being afraid to go out in public alone. That's not a society I'd like to live in.

The world is unjust. Therefore, any true interpretation of the world would lead to that conclusion.

[QUOTE="Teenaged"][QUOTE="THUMPTABLE"]
To your last comment, i read a stat from this board saying that 70% of the crims in US prisions are christian. How do you view that?THUMPTABLE

I'm simply saying that if a person has done something horrible and gets away with it, is it just that he never has to answer for his actions?

mindstorm

Who said life was fair?

I know it's a cliche but: "Life's a ***** then you die":P

For the person who does not believe there will be any judgment outside of this life, there are only two things which keeps order: conscience and civil/government order.  For this person, if you do something morally wrong and do not get caught then you can get away with it.  At first, this seems appealing when looking at our own wrong doings.  "I will never face responsibility for ----!"

The problem is that this means people who get away with murder, rape, incest, etc. will never be judged in a just fashion.  They will get away free without any form of consequence.  Often times, there will be nothing but temporal social justice and for many, relative morality.  Is there any justice in this?

We could get into what Christians believe regarding this, but I'd prefer the discussion deal more with the atheist's belief in justice for simplicity's sake.

 

mindstorm

I believe Christian salvation is unjust. A horrible murderer can turn to Christ and receive holy salvation (John 3:16, etc), whereas a moral infidel leads a just life and gets flamey hell.

People don't usually get away with rape or murder, regardless of the prevelent faith. Positive social interaction is a requirement for communal living. It has been way B.C.

Darwin's quotation comes to mind:

"The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference."

There's no true justice (justice here being defined as desert) within naturalism. Probably the same for atheism.

Why all the good and evil/justice threads?itsTolkien_time

One thing that I've found about theists is that they're very concerned with values. Good, evil, justice, morality, these are all things that are of the foremost importance and I think in some cases they override.... well reality. Heck the creationism movement is propelled in no small way by the misunderstanding that evolution would bring about immorality.

One thing that I've found about theists is that they're very concerned with values. Good, evil, justice, morality, these are all things that are of the foremost importance and I think in some cases they override.... well reality.domatron23

Heck the creationism movement is propelled in no small way by the misunderstanding that evolution would bring about immorality. domatron23

Wait, what...? :? Why would it do that?ChiliDragon

>_>

Not of course that that's the only reason.

[QUOTE="domatron23"]One thing that I've found about theists is that they're very concerned with values. Good, evil, justice, morality, these are all things that are of the foremost importance and I think in some cases they override.... well reality.ChiliDragon

Well yes of course human affairs are a part of reality. Projecting our affairs onto a cosmic lawgiver oversteps that boundary of reality though.

[QUOTE="domatron23"]Heck the creationism movement is propelled in no small way by the misunderstanding that evolution would bring about immorality. ChiliDragon

Ever heard "if you believe we came from monkeys then you can expect us to act like monkies"? What about the common reductio ad hitlerum that is always brought up in regards to the eugenics program of the nazis? These are misunderstandings that I see all the time.

More importantly though evolution undermines a literal Genesis, and if Genesis isn't literally true then (by the sincere belief of some people) there is no basis for morality. The "specialness" of human life has to derive from the direct creation of God. A quick visit to answers in genesis and an input of "evolution morality" should give you more of an idea.

Well yes of course human affairs are a part of reality. Projecting our affairs onto a cosmic lawgiver oversteps that boundary of reality though.domatron23

Ever heard "if you believe we came from monkeys then you can expect us to act like monkeys"?domatron23

Personally, I am not terribly concerned with "true justice".  People have a sense that if someone hurts someone else, then all will be well once again in the universe if that person is hurt as well, thereby somehow putting the cosmic scales of justice back into balance.  But that just isn't true.  When someone does you wrong, the only scales that are upset are yours and those whom you care about.  If you then hurt that person in return, then you will upset that person's scales, while yours are still left in their unbalanced state.  Then that person, seeing the imbalance now in his life, will do the same back to you, and on it goes.  Both of you now think that you may make the world right again if you only hurt the other person enough.  A good real-world example of this sort of setup is the conflict between Israel and Palestine.

At its very heart, forgiveness is the acceptance of injustice, as it acknowledges that someone has done you wrong, but rather than demanding repayment (i.e., justice), it simply resets the scales and demands nothing.  And I think that is precisely why people have such trouble with forgiveness: they are still in the frame of mind described above, where they feel that if a wrong deed is not repaid in kind, then the universe is out of balance.  But it is, ultimately, the only way to truly get oneself back into balance: to accept what is past and that which cannot be undone, and to disallow it from troubling you any longer.