Your probable right since God never told Adam and Eve that they were naked. In fact I would say that he sounded quite upset about the fact that they knew.

They are but which powers to be. Moses or God. Since the ten commandments are a guide on how to treat your neighbors, and God. I don't really see a problem with them because they might be a moral code set by the powers that be.

yes but noone can say they have proof of any of that other then a book. yes moral code doesnt mean it came from god noone the less

*ahem*


If electricity comes from electrons, does that mean that morality comes from morons?


*taps mic*


Is this thing on?

Morals are very fluid and depend on the culture and society that holds them. Here is something entertaining:



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Did_the_Pedestrian_Die%3F

May be reading your quote wrong, but I have not one problem with the ten commandments. Atheist, christian, muslim, buddist, they should all at least acknowledge some of these morals and not break them for the most part. God or men, these morals would help mankind in the state of "crazy" that we are in today.

The ten camandments are a list of "morals"/"rules that had been around for along time. They were just put on tablets nothing special about them at all since most followed those rules anyway. Morals came from compassion and caring for your fellow man. One would just not sit around and watch one starve nor watch a crime being commited that hurt someone they cared about. People had compassion well befor the ten comandments were written. IMO morals came from our ability to feel compassion.

Or set by the powers that were [in charge at the time, that is].

As others have already stated, they were by no means original concepts.

capeo, I'm always impressed by your posts

I do find it a little disheartening that some individuals essentially state the only reason I or anyone else does not go around killing and raping people is because God told us not to. For a people living by faith, they sure don't have much faith that their fellow human beings can control themselves.

I don't believe in a God, yet I still don't do those things. Why? For the reason in bold capeo stated above.

Plus, I kind of have this empathy thing going on; I know, I know...I'm a freak.


I did think this was funny, SunDogDayze Just had to give some props where props are due.

daniel,

We have been social animals for very much longer than we have been religious animals. All of the basic morality we have derives from this sociability - not from religion. Religion simply co-opts common morality because then it gains acceptability as 'the way'.

So, morality did not 'appear out of no place', but evolved because we had a need to survive together in groups.

what concern's me is that many think religion is 'the' moral dictum and the huge issues this creates is the methods that have been used to enforce this....often it results in harm of some kind be it intolerance or hatred or persecution or punishment or shunning and death .... it is an incomplete understanding as many have already said regard for others is innate, its when we teach that you are inherently evil using a 'authority' that is unseen/unproven, unknown, unlocatable humans are creating the dysfunctions/harms we find ourself dealing with....

I am sorry but I have to disagree with this.


I will refer to the chimps that war with each other. As far as we know they don't have a religion. All they are trying to do is grab more territory or different territory.


mer cats war with each other for the same reason. For the most part that is the main reason humans war with each other.

All religion does is give it more authority when being fought.

The first truth in any war, is God is on our side. In the current war on terror, the terrorists claim that Allah is on their side, and Bush supposed prayed to make sure he was doing the right thing.

In world war 2 Hitler really couldn't say God was on his side while he was killing the Jews. So he made a new religion and made himself God.

Oh, well as long as Bush prayed he was doing the right thing first.

Let's send in some 'nucular' bombs and pray they don't kill the wrong people.

That was his way of saying that God was on our side.

daniel at beset you are applying an anthropocentric viewpoint.....

And my previous post still stands.

Hitler thought God was on his side too...but yet he lost the war.

Then so is ever nature show on animal plant since this where I got this info from about the chimps and about the mere cats. I watched their little weekly show on the mere cats.


Those little animals were doing one of three things eating, fighting for territory or having sex. That's it except for the babysitters.


sorry about the spelling.

Even if there is no God, the arguement that morals came from, let's say, the bible could still hold. Though in that case it'd be that humans created these morals. For one reason or another, they thought it would be a good idea to follow these morals. Many religions have similar morals, so that just shows that a specific God, or any God for that matter is not required. And just to let you know, not all humans share the same morals, so saying that it's within us and not a taught behavior is a stretch. In order for morals to come from God and not just learned behavior, specific morals would have to be within us.

Adam and eve? You actually believe adam and eve existed? 2000 years before the old testament was written the entire world had been populated by humans for thousands of years.

exactly even if the bible held up time wouldnt even come close to matching up....also yeah hitler did think god was on there side a..explaine that and that.....b....i love the nuke comment its true and look war is war if no religon like someone else said we would find a differnt excuse for it....wow mear cats sound alot like us

excuse me? not all creationsts are pretty stupiid..go easy there daniel lol..there is the odd one or two that do make themselves look silly and dumb the faith down with silly answers..but that dont mean all creationists are stupid

Ive seen a couple dumb the faith down on here, but they dont count for the rest of the creationists...

that will never happen...ever..not in this lifetine...you are correct nudity is not immoral...but I still wouldnt want my hubby running around in front of my kid buck naked!!! and having to look at some out of shaper saggy butts all over town...!!!

Moral behavior has survival value; it gives the group a better chance of survival, thus it is favored by natural selection. Quite simple, really.


They got cold.

Humans did not move out of the forests of Eurasia until clothing had been developed. Without it, they could not survive on the tundra. The exploration of the Americas had to wait until clothing had been invented.

Many people lack hangups about nudity. There are two nudist clubs here in Oklahoma, last time I counted. Many native tribes of the Amazon basin do not wear clothes - it's too hot. Many Polynesian cultures lived naked or partially naked and some still do. So, the idea that nudity is wrong is a church invention; there is nothing intrinsically wrong about it. Most people who try nudism for the first time are completely comfortable with it in a matter of hours, or even minutes.

Clothing was instrumental in the evolution of syphilis. In the tropical Caribean, the organism was just a skin lesion that was passed around by skin contact. Among Columbus' crew of Europeans, who only touched each other's skin when having sex, the organism became a venereal disease. A little nudity would have prevented its development.


Last time I looked, apes did not wear clothes, except in circuses, where they are - aping - people.


EVERYONE else? I don't know how many member clubs the American Association for Nude Recreation has, but the list is a long one. Really, danielost, take your clothes off - you might just enjoy it.
Doug

P.S.: You just said it: "...when it was cold." That's a good reason to wear clothes. Also, protection from the sun, biting insects and armor plating to deal with thorns, branches and sticks.
Doug

The beginning of wisdom. Doug

You guys like to have everything just happen no ryme nor reason to it.
[/quote]


I see what your saying kind of like the Christian God has always existed just out of no where....

My dog works with me when I go into the woods to collect data. She doesn't wear clothes, probably because she can't put them on by herself. But she has a collar and loves to make it jingle. She gets positively snippy if I take it away from her.
Doug

I read an article on the evolution (that word!) of body lice. Seems a new species evolved about the time people started wearing clothes routinely - a new habitat. That suggests we were naked at the time.

Humans sweat - many creatures do not. In hunting, or other strenuous activity, fur impeeds heat flow. We lost ours to improve our heat flow situation, seeing as we lived in a warm climate and didn't need fur to keep warm. Our northward spread stopped when we ran up against the cold of northern Eurasia; it started again when we invented clothes.

So, our natural state is - our natural state.
Doug

Fine with me. Doug

Some Peace Corps volunteers were assigned to a small Pacific Island where normal dress consisted of a waist thong for men and a grass skirt for women. The volunteers continued wearing western-style dress in spite of the local's suggestions that they would be more comfortable dressed like them.

After several weeks, the local folks solved the problem by stealing the volunteers' clothes. They soon adopted "native dress" and spent the rest of their service time in waist thongs and grass skirts.
Doug

wow man wow......

I heard a story of a girl who checked in at a nudist camp in Colorado right after Memorial Day and didn't put on clothes again until she had to leave for school in the fall. Don't know whether the story is true or not, but I know some born-again nudists that I could imagine doing this.
Doug

wow so what are you trying to say lol ok would you?

Darned if I know what I'm trying to say. I keep thinking how much that would cost and wondering where she got all the money. Doug

would it even cost that much i mean couldnt someone be a neudist in there own home?

perhaps you have heard of black beach in california ( it is closed now) but when I was a teenager I spent my summers there along with other nudies naked and loving it..I just thought it was ignorant to get so uptight now you can't wear a g-string bathing suit or you are subject to a ticket....oy vey.....

In your own home wouldn't cost much, but the story had her staying at a camp and they can be expensive. Doug

There are still places around. Check the AANR website for a list of clubs.

I agree. We need to get over our problems with naked humanity. Doug

I seem to keep asking the right questions.

?????

Getting back on the topic of where morals came from...

Aithiests would argue that morals are the result of certain parts of the brain reacting in different ways to different stimuli the way it is programed to react.Simply,you kill someone and then you feel guilty because that's the way your brain works.

Of course that raises the question of how the brain was programmed that way,which leads to an evolution vs. creation debate.

its not from god if animals dont have sould but they have morals then where is the logic its from god?

Animals don't have souls or morals.They act purely on instinct and programming,like a computer.Humans have something else,something that let's us distinguish between right and wrong.Animals can't do that.

any wonder its now CLOSED!!!!!!

they do know right from wrong at a young age they are taught like a dog how to behave in animal society and at a young age we are trained how to live in ours and yes this is for every animal so no god instinct to fit it.

Domestic dogs are taught what they should do for a treat and what will happen when they do what their master doesn't want them to do.That's not right and wrong.You may say 'good dog' or 'bad dog' but all he knows is that if he doesn't sit he wont get the treat but if he does then he will get the treat.In the wild young animals are taught by their parents how to survive.In social groups like lions,they are taught how to act around lions of higher status,like the dominant males,so as not to be killed.Alot of it is also instinct,something ingrained in their behavior from the time they were born.Like with many grazing animals they automatically how to look for the best grass.Instinct.Not right and wrong.

I agree weregirl666, they are taught primarily through their parents how to act in animal society. Our actions have a sheen of gloss over them - we pretend we are the great arbiters of wrong and right but essentially we have these feelings to get along in our pack like other animals.

I think it would help if you defined, moral. I think you may need to define varying degrees of social norms.





Thats not true at all. Social animals can be said to have social norms, values, taboos and even morals. Individuals within the society are free to choose to break or follow the rules, just as in human society. I would suggest watching meerkat manor on animal planet to see just how serious and complex animal societies can be.


As to the original question, I would add that early hominids started off in small, yet complex social groups. As we evolved, both physically and in agriculture use, we lived in larger and larger societies. The surplus of food allowed different individuals to spend more time pursing non-sustenance related tasks. This eventually allowed for class differentiation in our societies. Because societal behaviors are learned and not inherited, it required a great deal of cultural teachings for our children.

Complex social life certainly has an evolutionary basis. The "2 heads are better than one" mentality if you will. Living in complex societies provides organisms with a great many benefits, shared parental care, shared food etc. Problems arise in complex groups however, if all individuals are not mutually altruistic (cheaters arise in the group) then the group will eventually fail. To counter cheaters, or selfish individuals, groups develop first simple, then more complex rules. Breaking these rules results in exile from the group. The incentive to follow the rules comes from the benefits provided of group life.

We can look at this with an example of a simple game.

Lets say you and a friend are both picked up by the police for possibly committing a crime, actual guilt is irrelevant in this example. The police separate you two in different cells and you are told the same thing.

If you both confess to the crime you get 5 years in prison.
If neither of confess the police will pin a part of the crime on each person, resulting a 2 year sentence for both of you.
If one of you confess, you can strike a deal with the police and the other will get 10 years in jail, while you go free.

This game is called the Prisoner's Dilemma, it is an example of a zero-sum game in game theory (ever see a beautiful mind?) and is used extensively in economics as well as biology.

Upon first inspection the choice seems clear. You rat, get to walk and your friend goes to jail. For the same reason you rat though, your friend is likely to rat. Now you both get 5 years in prison. The best outcome for the group then becomes for you two to cooperate, by not confessing. You both serve your 2 years then get to go home.

Thus, the group has an unspoken rule, a moral if you will. The altruistic behavior (not confessing) far outweighs the selfish behavior.

In this same way, "morals"/Norms/Taboos arise in complex animal social groups. The benefit of cooperating outweighs the risks associated with selfish behavior.

I have concluded after much thought on the subject that a good thing is something loving and a bad thing is something greedy. THe law is irrelevant to this.

Gee, one would think that if "god" bestowed morals on the world, then they would be the same the world over, no?
In Western culture, suicide is frowned upon, but in Eastern culture, suicide is often thought of as a way to regain one's honour.


But of course, humans couldn't possibly ever come up with a moral code all by their little old selves.
Nope, they must be too stupid. Only a supernatural being, who is considered to be "unfathomable", could possibly create a code of conduct for a bunch of hairless primates to follow.