Harvard Professor talks about Democracy and Religion

Originally posted by Omega Vision
If we remember Rust's response to him: " If the only thing keeping a person decent is the expectation of divine reward, then, brother, that person is a piece of shit"

Originally posted by Omega Vision
People need some kind of moral framework, but it doesn't have to come from religion. Look at China, Chinese people aren't constantly murdering, robbing, and butt****ing each other in the streets, and very few of them practice religion.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
People need some kind of moral framework, but it doesn't have to come from religion. Look at China, Chinese people aren't constantly murdering, robbing, and butt****ing each other in the streets, and very few of them practice religion.

But theyre dicks. http://www.ijreview.com/2015/09/412249-pedestrians-china-keep-getting-run-killed-cars-horrifying-reason/

Originally posted by Astner
So you'd rather live among criminals than people whose altruism is grounded in religion?

It's not morals that deters Chinese citizens from behaving poorly, it's the mass execution of its criminals that does. In case you didn't know, China is not a democracy.

Ahh okay so you're one of those who still believes that the death penalty acts as a deterrent. Good to know.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Where did you get this from?

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Ahh okay so you're one of those who still believes that the death penalty acts as a deterrent. Good to know.

However, the way it's implemented in the States is not particularly effective, especially not when compared to the way it's implemented in China; and I hope you know the difference.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Lol, in no way does the Rust quote suggest that. As the quote continues, Rust states that he thinks people who are only kept moral by religion are dangerous phonies, and they should be outed as people without real integrity.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
I don't even know whose post you are replying to so I don't know how you expect me to determine how one person can interpret anything....

My first post wasn't aimed at any specific person. But it seemed to me this video was saying that it is religion that keeps people from committing crimes. That is how I took it. Thus, if that were true, the prisons would be full of nothing but atheists, yes?

When I ask how else to interpret the message, I am referring to the video. When the guy is saying shit like that about religion over images of people being arrested, violence, etc. what is one supposed to take away from it, other then what I took?

It sure as hell ends up coming off like "well, democracy needs religion and the world will fall into decay without religion". Maybe I am wrong.

Does he have evidence to refute the (heavily studied) idea that atheists are actually more moral on the whole than those who are religious? Seriously, it's been studied and repeated ad nauseum for decades.

If I thought it meant societal collapse, I wouldn't espouse secularism just because that's what I believe. I would see the greater whole and understand that religion is a necessary part of the social fabric of society. As it is, I don't see much merit in his argument in the face of evidence. That he's a Harvard prof. is nice and all, but appeals to authority can be found that back either side of many (most?) debates.

Economic factors have more to do with crime than religious ones anyway. Secular, religious...I don't think it matters a whole lot compared to economic variables.

Does he have evidence to refute the (heavily studied) idea that atheists are actually more moral on the whole than those who are religious? Seriously, it's been studied and repeated ad nauseum for decades.

Morality has very little to do with religion vs. atheism.

Originally posted by psmith81992
Really? Please show me an actual peer reviewed study that doesn't include a minimal sample size. To suggest such a study to be conclusive whether religious are more moral or atheists, is asinine.

Indeed.

The guy didn't really cite evidence of any kind in the video. Just talked about what one dude told him about religion, and his take on it's need for sustained democracy and all that jazz. I just plain do not agree. It just sounds silly to me. It seems to be that because the guy is from Harvard we're supposed to take what he says seriously.

I also agree that someone who is only a decent person because they are afraid of some punishment in the afterlife is a piece of shit. I'd actually take it one step further and qualify such a person as utterly insane.

I find most people don't have the desire to be overly shitty. Just out of a simple "don't mess with mine I won't mess with yours" mentality. On top of that, most people like their comforts and don't think the risk of imprisonment is worth doing anything too crazy.

Originally posted by psmith81992
Really? Please show me an actual peer reviewed study that doesn't include a minimal sample size. To suggest such a study to be conclusive whether religious are more moral or atheists, is asinine.

Morality has very little to do with religion vs. atheism.

I'll go one better. I can show you several:
http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=479017

The studies are all cited in enough detail that you can look them up individually.

I agree with you that it's asinine to expect a single study to produce results that are trustworthy. Which is why I didn't make the claim based on a single study. Even with the dozens of studies cited or compiled in those results, truth is provisional with these things, and subject to further evidence. But the correlation is strong and clear throughout numerous studies, to the point where I feel it's justified to make the claim, knowing that it isn't made lightly nor without extensive research.

If you have competing or complimentary evidence, I'd legitimately love to see it.

Originally posted by Digi
I'll go one better. I can show you several:
http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=479017

The studies are all cited in enough detail that you can look them up individually.

I agree with you that it's asinine to expect a single study to produce results that are trustworthy. Which is why I didn't make the claim based on a single study. Even with the dozens of studies cited or compiled in those results, truth is provisional with these things, and subject to further evidence. But the correlation is strong and clear throughout numerous studies, to the point where I feel it's justified to make the claim, knowing that it isn't made lightly nor without extensive research.

If you have competing or complimentary evidence, I'd legitimately love to see it.

http://www.livescience.com/47799-morality-religion-political-beliefs.html
This study simply shows that religious people aren't necessarily more moral.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/why-religion-is-natural-and-science-is-not/201203/are-religious-people-more-moral-atheists

I also have a problem with self reporting as far as "atheists" and actual religious people are concerned. A lot of people equate spiritual with religious as well. Finally, where are the links in your post, detailing these studies? You didn't post any and I can't find any actual studies.

I also agree that someone who is only a decent person because they are afraid of some punishment in the afterlife is a piece of shit. I'd actually take it one step further and qualify such a person as utterly insane.

But I was talking about people who specifically do not do things because God said it is wrong, as opposed to people not doing things simply because it is in their nature.

You want to talk about intelligent posts, but it's going to be hard since the subject is religion.

Originally posted by Surtur
But I was talking about people who specifically do not do things because God said it is wrong, as opposed to people not doing things simply because it is in their nature.

You want to talk about intelligent posts, but it's going to be hard since the subject is religion.

No, it's going to be hard to find with atheists who don't know how to properly argue against religion, instead bringing their emotions and biases against it. I know what you were talking about and my point stands.

Yet my point still stands as well: if you are only being decent because God told you to..there is a problem.

I too would take issue with someone doing something good ONLY because God says so, not because they see the intrinsic value of it. However, I don't think that's what most people do, even if that's what they cite as their reasoning for good works.

Originally posted by psmith81992
http://www.livescience.com/47799-morality-religion-political-beliefs.html
This study simply shows that religious people aren't necessarily more moral.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/why-religion-is-natural-and-science-is-not/201203/are-religious-people-more-moral-atheists

I also have a problem with self reporting as far as "atheists" and actual religious people are concerned. A lot of people equate spiritual with religious as well. Finally, where are the links in your post, detailing these studies? You didn't post any and I can't find any actual studies.

This isn't an intelligent post. You find it "insane" because you already don't believe in god. It's very rational for those that have a profound belief in God to fear him (and his punishments).

I cited the magazine and article from which they came. You're welcome to read it for the full article from which I pulled the studies. But I didn't look these up on the internet, which doesn't invalidate the studies. As it is, the book with the metadata can be found with a simple Google search, as can a few of the studies by copy/pasting the names of the researchers and the year. I can't do all of the legwork for you, especially when I've gone to great pains already to cite the data accurately. /srug

Your links don't seem to refute my point. The latter in particular deals more with the affects of priming than it does with anything having to do with religion. Priming is fascinating, but somewhat beside the point here.

I'll address the former, though. If your point is that other factors outside religion are largely responsible for morality, I'd actually agree with you wholeheartedly. Good and evil are human characteristics, largely irrespective of religious affiliation. I've agreed with that for years. But what the studies I cited show is that religious affiliation - and the beliefs attached to them - are, in fact, a variable in the question that is morality. Not the ONLY one, and perhaps not even the most important one. But a tangible one. Because just as it would be ludicrous to think that religion is the sole variable in morality, I find it just as ludicrous that such a comprehensive worldview and - often - dogma with guidelines for morality wouldn't affect a person's morals at all.

Originally posted by Surtur
Yet my point still stands as well: if you are only being decent because God told you to..there is a problem.

I'll address the former, though. If your point is that other factors outside religion are largely responsible for morality, I'd actually agree with you wholeheartedly. Good and evil are human characteristics, largely irrespective of religious affiliation. I've agreed with that for years. But what the studies I cited show is that religious affiliation - and the beliefs attached to them - are, in fact, a variable in the question that is morality. Not the ONLY one, and perhaps not even the most important one. But a tangible one. Because just as it would be ludicrous to think that religion is the sole variable in morality, I find it just as ludicrous that such a comprehensive worldview and - often - dogma with guidelines for morality wouldn't affect a person's morals at all.

Originally posted by psmith81992
THat isn't a point, it's an opinion based off of your dislike for religion.

Yes, I dislike people who only act like decent human beings because they think they will get some nifty prize when they die. That is definitely my opinion.