Are You Only "Good" Because You Are Afraid Of Being "Bad"?

[Questing Beast]

If the whole world woke up this morning knowing that heaven and hell were only man-made concepts, that you can in fact do whatever you want to, tomorrow, the day after that, forever, and nothing is going to happen to you permanently, i.e. no "final judgment" and consignment to "heaven" or "hell", would you still want good things or would you want bad things?

If the entire historical edifice defining "good and bad" was stripped away and you had to define it for yourself, what would you judge by?

I would continue as I am. Because I know my feelings steer me rightly toward that which is just. I make mistakes. But I correct them instantly, as I can, and never put off correction even for a moment of self indulgence. That is my paradigm of living by Justice.

But I allow that some people don't know good and bad, right and wrong, by their feelings alone. They are dark creatures, yet, and require guidance. And thus we have dogma in place, and the coercion that powers the dogma, otherwise known as religion.

My belief is that if the elimination of all dogmatic belief occurred, that the world would not melt down into anarchy of selfishness and sin. In other words, I believe that the vast majority of people are good because they like how it feels better than being bad. Only a very few are so messed up that they are dangerously bad.

So the "job" of religion is largely redundant, and most of us fear needlessly because of religious inculcation in childhood....

[The Nehor]

I would still love God even if he was powerless and could offer me nothing after this life.

In some ways that religion is more appealing. It has a Norse "last futile stand" quality I find appealing. To fight the doomed lost cause when in the end the stupid brutes will prevail.

[Duncan]

who wants to deal with useless junkola in this life, so I want to avoid bad stuff and not have to deal with the consequences of dumb or bad behaviour

[The Nehor]

who wants to deal with useless junkola in this life, so I want to avoid bad stuff and not have to deal with the consequences of dumb or bad behaviour

Dumb and bad behvior do not always have negative consequences. Good behavior often has negative consequences. According to Christianity being sinless and good is a good way to get executed.

[Ahab]

So the "job" of religion is largely redundant, and most of us fear needlessly because of religious inculcation in childhood....

The "job" or purpose of religion is to share how we can have the maximum amount of joy in our lives, both now and hereafter, forever and ever. That's what the "good news" is all about, and what our Lord said he came here to do. That we might have joy, and more abundantly, than we would be able to have without his help.

If that's not a Duh! moment for something you already knew I hope you'll now have an Aha! moment.

Wake up and smell the roses.

Edited February 12, 2013 by Ahab

[The Nehor]

So the "job" of religion is largely redundant, and most of us fear needlessly because of religious inculcation in childhood....

I should add that I disagree completely with the idea that religion's job is to make us good. History and the present both suggest to me that it often has the opposite effect. Nothing overcomes our natural reticience to work evil then the slogan, "God wills it!"

The job of religion is to explain the facts about reality. I would argue that the LDS faith has the facts as far as they have been revealed. Those facts entice people to do good. They also can result in great evil; it is doubtful anyone earned Perdition when the gospel was not on the earth.

One of. He defining qualities of humanity is our desire to know and understand things. One of the great shames of our age is how pervasively it has become okay to make up the facts that make us most comfortable and everyone nods understandably instead of thinking the person is insane. This temptation has always been with us throughout the ages but it is disgusting how openly accepted this conceit is.

[BlueDreams]

So the "job" of religion is largely redundant, and most of us fear needlessly because of religious inculcation in childhood....

I disagree with this first assumption that's also seen in your first post. There are things that according to my current moral stance are wrong. I don't do them because I fear judgment. I don't do them because I love God more than them.

I also understand that there are also logical reason not to do certain things. But honestly there's enough means that I could get around most poor consequences and I would believe enough in myself to believe that I could also avoid a number of them.

Now for your first questions:

If the whole world woke up this morning knowing that heaven and hell were only man-made concepts, that you can in fact do whatever you want to, tomorrow, the day after that, forever, and nothing is going to happen to you permanently, i.e. no "final judgment" and consignment to "heaven" or "hell", would you still want good things or would you want bad things?

I wouldn't be going out and going on a murdering spree. I wouldn't be drinking a ton. I wouldn't hit up random drugs. Etc. I would still want to generally do good and there would be things that I would work to become and would make the proper steps to make sure I could do it. But my moral stances would change to some extent. There would be things I'd ease up on and change and do. My ideal about what is good or not would change and that would alter my behavior.

What is good alters and it would most likely just be whatever the norm is in many ways.

If the entire historical edifice defining "good and bad" was stripped away and you had to define it for yourself, what would you judge by?

By what I want most. And what I sense is good. There are some universals that most of us agree to, but it would still be humanly developed. It's not just religion that decides what's good or not in people's life. People have jacked with religion, culture, etc to fit their means as they see fit, adopting ideals that fit their current interest. I do think that in some respects the world would be worse off without religion. But I also think in most ways it would be just about the same. Good, bad, and gray.

With luv,

BD

[TAO]

QuestingBeast, have you ever experienced a time in your life when you were somewhat detatched from society?

I always have been less close to society for most of my life, and thus, less prone to it's ethics. For some of the ethics, I adhere to them, but it's more out of sheer practiaclity, rather than any strong feeling (some of them I do genuinely feel are correct, however).

People who are not bound to society, without a religion, will not feel as obligated to hold the moral values others expect. Relgion, in that sense, creates an important second protection barrier around what we consider morality.

So yes, for some (I'm not sure if I'd be one), a deterioration of religion would be a step into chaos. Because without religion, morality becomes much more mundane and social. And for those of us who aren't bound to social quite as strongly, that can create some problems.

Just my thoughts on the issue,

-TAO

Edited February 12, 2013 by TAO

[mfbukowski]

A wise person once said "the God that is between your ears is the only one you have to deal with".

No matter where you stand, I think that is good advice.

[Ahab]

A wise person once said "the God that is between your ears is the only one you have to deal with".

No matter where you stand, I think that is good advice.

No, because that can limit us to only ourselves and there is always someone better who we can learn from.

[Hamba Tuhan]

My belief is that if the elimination of all dogmatic belief occurred, that the world would not melt down into anarchy of selfishness and sin ...

So the "job" of religion is largely redundant, and most of us fear needlessly because of religious inculcation in childhood....

I would strongly suggest that you are speaking from a privileged position of riding upon the almost-unseen shoulders of hundreds of years of Christian influence in the 'world' you know.

In my corner of the world, before 'dogmatic' religion arrived, people didn't live in fear of 'being "bad"'; they simply lived in fear. All the time. Villages consisted of closely related individuals whose houses were clustered together behind protective walls ... sometimes even in treetops. Every single morning, a trip outside that wall to attend to one's gardens or orchards carried with it the risk of encounter with a neighbouring clan. This would inevitably result in attack since warfare was endemic. For the losing side, the men would be killed, their severed heads would be stuck on poles around the other village's palisade, and their flesh would be eaten. Women and children would sometimes be killed, sometimes enslaved. It was not unusual to wake up and discover that gardens/orchards had been torched by enemies during the night, after which famine ensued.

Behind many of the protective walls, men and women occupied completely separate quarters, with the latter little more than slaves to their husbands/fathers/brothers. Once little boys grew up a bit, they were brought into the men's compound and taught to perform sexual acts on the older males -- something they were told was necessary to ensure their own virility later in life. They would remain virtual sex slaves to men til they were themselves classed as adults and able to marry.

I hope you'll forgive us for not sharing your rosy view of life without religion. Been there, done that.

Edited February 12, 2013 by Hamba Tuhan

[The Nehor]

A wise person once said "the God that is between your ears is the only one you have to deal with".

No matter where you stand, I think that is good advice.

Tell God that. It would make my life easier though probably less fulfilling.

[Questing Beast]

...

I hope you'll forgive us for not sharing your rosy view of life without religion. Been there, done that.

No you haven't. None of us have "done that". And I am skeptical about your historical view of how bad everything was before Christianity showed up. When it became the "dominant paradigm" it exercised absolute control via the "state" over every aspect of life, for centuries. Only through a long process of rebellion did "we" escape the terror of religious punishment.

The influence of religion has always been with us and always will. It's the dogmatic kind that seeks conformity that I am wondering about the future of. Is it dying out? Is individual religion replacing dogma? And if so, are people getting "more wicked" or more liberated to approach "God" without fear?...

[Duncan]

Dumb and bad behvior do not always have negative consequences. Good behavior often has negative consequences. According to Christianity being sinless and good is a good way to get executed.

touche! but en garde! I am watching Stevie the TV so I will think about it later

[Hamba Tuhan]

And I am skeptical about your historical view of how bad everything was before Christianity showed up.

Oddly, the examiners of my PhD thesis expressed unanimous approval of my 'historical view', but of course it may be that somehow you know more than they do.

When it became the "dominant paradigm" it exercised absolute control via the "state" over every aspect of life, for centuries. Only through a long process of rebellion did "we" escape the terror of religious punishment.

If you're going to engage in history, I suggest you may want to contextualise your statements. Where and when are you speaking about? Or have you assumed that 'Christianisation' has been a monolithic process at all times and in all places? I must admit that I'm rather skeptical of your claim of 'absolute control' for any specific location/time period, but until I know the context, I'm in no position to critique such a claim.

It's the dogmatic kind that seeks conformity that I am wondering about the future of. Is it dying out? Is individual religion replacing dogma? And if so, are people getting "more wicked" or more liberated to approach "God" without fear?...

I know several hundred Christians who are grateful to be able to leave their houses each Sunday to walk to church without fear of their heads ending up as trophies, and I rather suspect they're appreciative of all those around them who have sacrificed their 'individual religions' in order to conform to the dogma 'Thou shalt not kill'.

Edited February 13, 2013 by Hamba Tuhan

[blackstrap]

The BoM has one of many accounts about what happens to civilized society when "every man doeth what seemeth him right " Tribalization in family units and clans quickly arises and wars become constant. Hamba paints a correct picture of the inevitable.From the pre Mohammed Arabs to the current tribes of New Guinea and the Amazon , the 'we good them bad ' philosophy gets very narrowly interpreted .

[mfbukowski]

Tell God that. It would make my life easier though probably less fulfilling.

Well I would if I could do it without what is between my ears. Unfortunately that is the way I communicate with Him, and He with me.

[Storm Rider]

As I review my life I find that I generally have preferred to treat others well, take pleasure in service and charitable works, and found happiness is choosing what most of us consider a moral life. However, I have also come to a complete realization that I am a sinner and have fallen to temptation in wide range of areas as I bumble along in my life. I suspect that the world at large and all societies would begin to reflect the qualities of lie a little, cheat a little, for tomorrow we die. We see societies today that reflect these same attitudes even with the knowledge of God; I cannot imagine what it would be like if they felt there was no God at all.

[Stargazer]

I suppose some would go hog wild once there was no final judgement to worry about, only worldly consequences.

But I've done a lot of bad things in my dreams (I mean nighttime sleepy dreams), and woke up feeling remorseful. Not that I was worried God would spank me, but because I simply felt bad about my dreaming wrongdoing.

There are things I've done 40 years ago that I still feel ashamed of, but that were not then and are not now "sins".

I am just a goody-twoshoes.

I believe I have lots of company in this category.

[The Nehor]

No you haven't. None of us have "done that". And I am skeptical about your historical view of how bad everything was before Christianity showed up. When it became the "dominant paradigm" it exercised absolute control via the "state" over every aspect of life, for centuries. Only through a long process of rebellion did "we" escape the terror of religious punishment.

You are vastly overrating the influence of the Catholic Church through history. At no point did it have absolute power or anything approaching it. It did not control the state either.

[Sky]

If the whole world woke up this morning knowing that heaven and hell were only man-made concepts, that you can in fact do whatever you want to, tomorrow, the day after that, forever, and nothing is going to happen to you permanently, i.e. no "final judgment" and consignment to "heaven" or "hell", would you still want good things or would you want bad things?

If the entire historical edifice defining "good and bad" was stripped away and you had to define it for yourself, what would you judge by?

I would continue as I am. Because I know my feelings steer me rightly toward that which is just. I make mistakes. But I correct them instantly, as I can, and never put off correction even for a moment of self indulgence. That is my paradigm of living by Justice.

But I allow that some people don't know good and bad, right and wrong, by their feelings alone. They are dark creatures, yet, and require guidance. And thus we have dogma in place, and the coercion that powers the dogma, otherwise known as religion.

My belief is that if the elimination of all dogmatic belief occurred, that the world would not melt down into anarchy of selfishness and sin. In other words, I believe that the vast majority of people are good because they like how it feels better than being bad. Only a very few are so messed up that they are dangerously bad.

So the "job" of religion is largely redundant, and most of us fear needlessly because of religious inculcation in childhood....

Where do the concepts of "good" and "bad" come from, if not from religion?

What exactly is religion good for, in your view? Do you believe that we need religion for anything?

[thesometimesaint]

The purpose of the Church is to make bad men good, and good men better.

David O. McKay

To me that is reason enough to be a member. Any afterlife rewards are just icing on the cake.

[Hamba Tuhan]

Any afterlife rewards are just icing on the cake.

I reckon! As I have repeatedly told my bishop, if what I have right now were all I would enjoy for the rest of eternity, it would be enough and then some.

[Stroopwafel]

If the whole world woke up this morning knowing that heaven and hell were only man-made concepts, that you can in fact do whatever you want to, tomorrow, the day after that, forever, and nothing is going to happen to you permanently, i.e. no "final judgment" and consignment to "heaven" or "hell", would you still want good things or would you want bad things?

If the entire historical edifice defining "good and bad" was stripped away and you had to define it for yourself, what would you judge by?

This problematic has been considered and thought about a lot since at least the time Nietzsche pronounced the words "God is dead" and wondered what is Beyond Good and Evil.

Some existentialist philosophers have since considered how man could find his place in this world where, if indeed there is no God, there would not seem to be any kind of anchor for one's actions. Would it automatically mean that everything goes? Certainly not! For example, there could be meaning found in the relationship human beings have with each other.

Man would be faced with a tremendous responsibility. He is free to act, so how will he go about it? As a certain mister Sartre once said (I translate loosely here): "man is condemned to be free".

Personnaly, I don't think there are much people around who really want bad things. Bad and good things/acts are measured against certain standards, so if these standards change, then the things/acts that are labelled good or bad would as well, at least to some extent. Still, I do believe there are certain acts that will always be bad/evil. So I guess I would keep what the Church brought to my life and try to add to it (which is what I'm actually doing anyways...). What would change maybe would be the absence of guilt when one has shortcomings, and instead of having the reflex to see oneself as unworthy and dwell on imperfections, there would be a sense to do better and realize that falling one time does not make someone bad right away. But then, I think the result of a total absence of guilt would be terrible, as we know how humanity can behave when at least some guilt is not around. Anyways. Also, I think another interesting approach to life would be the Ancients' view on how one should live and their concept of virtue (see Aristotle).

[smac97]

Are You Only "Good" Because You Are Afraid Of Being "Bad"?

No. IMO, there are generally three broad motives for a person to obey a commandment from God: 1) Fear of Punishment; 2) Desire for Reward; and 3) Because the Person Loves God.

These are not mutually exclusive motives, but they can be. And if they co-exist, one typically predominates over the others.

If the whole world woke up this morning knowing that heaven and hell were only man-made concepts, that you can in fact do whatever you want to, tomorrow, the day after that, forever, and nothing is going to happen to you permanently, i.e. no "final judgment" and consignment to "heaven" or "hell", would you still want good things or would you want bad things?

If heaven and hell are "only man-made concepts," then so is "good" and "bad." So your question doesn't really make sense.

If the entire historical edifice defining "good and bad" was stripped away and you had to define it for yourself, what would you judge by?

Korihor already addressed this. In Alma 30.

I would continue as I am. Because I know my feelings steer me rightly toward that which is just.

But "justice" would be just as much a fabrication as "right" and "wrong."

I make mistakes. But I correct them instantly, as I can, and never put off correction even for a moment of self indulgence. That is my paradigm of living by Justice.

How do you quantify a "mistake" where "right" and "wrong" do not exist?

But I allow that some people don't know good and bad, right and wrong, by their feelings alone. They are dark creatures, yet, and require guidance. And thus we have dogma in place, and the coercion that powers the dogma, otherwise known as religion.

Yawn.

My belief is that if the elimination of all dogmatic belief occurred, that the world would not melt down into anarchy of selfishness and sin.

We are already headed that way, and that's with good people of conscience - including religionists - struggling against that trend.

In other words, I believe that the vast majority of people are good

A nonsensical claim, given that your paradigm calls for the abolishment of the concept of "good."

because they like how it feels better than being bad.

Well, that sounds an awful lot like the "Light of Christ."

This statement also presupposes that which you propose to abolish: the concepts of "good" and "bad."

So the "job" of religion is largely redundant, and most of us fear needlessly because of religious inculcation in childhood....

Unless, of course, there is more to religious belief than fear. Fortunately, there is more. Lots more. So your argument (such as it is) seems to fail right off the bat.

Thanks,

-Smac