Sniper & Sharpshooter Forums banner

1 - 2 of 2 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
994 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Recoil said:
Why the connection between morality and religion? Do you think that athiests and agnostics have no morals?
They don't, they're all damned for eternity.

Because people often cite "majority opinion" as an ought, and I just wanted to preface my post with, "I'm well aware that..."

Recoil said:
Only the most hardened athiests believe that we have no purpose here. Is that what you're saying you are (which is okay, that's your right)?
I'm agnostic, but from that the moral system (if any) I subscribe to cannot be determined. That said, one principle of morality that I employ (and need to explain for this post) is that people ought not to be used for means to ends, but as ends themselves. So long as your actions abide by this, I do not believe they are wrong.

1) You yourself said that you agree that it's important to remain alive for the benefit of family. 2) Why does one's life become worthless with the absence of family or other dependents? 3) If you're contemplating suicide, how do you know that you wont be the one to save someone tomorrow or even 4) meet the woman you will marry and have children with next week?

1) My life does not gain a value judgment merely because I have responsibilities of any sort (such as family); I merely have personal responsibilities to fulfill.

2) My life is not valueless if it is sans family, because it was not valuable if it has family. That's not to say it doesn't have value, or that I value my life more so if I have family, but the family itself does not add value intrinsically (but rather, extrinsically).

My life's value is determined by the amount of happiness it can obtain. Family adds happiness to my life, so family adds value to my life. If family goes away, I lose a lot of happiness (and perhaps form a deficit), but they are not the sole or necessary source of happiness.

3) I have no imperative to reserve myself for completely unpredictable circumstances of the future. If you have no knowledge--or any access to said knowledge--of your responsibilities, you are not responsible for them. I have no reason to believe I will need to save a life next week, and so if I'm not in the right place at the right time, will I be blamed for not saving that person's life? Of course not.

4) I have no responsibilities to the woman who 'would have been' my wife, and so I have no imperative to remain alive for her. Did I miss out? I probably did... but that isn't an immoral action because I did not use her as any sort of means, nor did I develop any responsibilities toward her.

If I value my level of happiness to be insufficient, and for whatever reason I know I will find nothing else to be fulfilling, and I have no responsibilities toward other people, then I see nothing wrong with ending my life.

Religion and faith are beautiful things, but because the purpose of faith is to surpass argumentation and the burdens of convincement, I don't think it needs to be discussed here (as we are looking for incongruencies within moral systems regarding suicide).

Scatch Maroo
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
238 Posts
you confused me with your first statement on damnation, was it a sarcasm, or am i just reading it wrong?

well suicide is a very hard topic to discuss on rights and wrongs, and more so is morality, so the combination is very complex, but I like to provide a non religious perspective to most things...so here goes...


now just to point out, religion and not to pick fun, but the christian old testament is an excellent book of morals, and if you look at how society was degrating, they needed to be lied to and said that this omnipotent being will strike you down if you dont start acting properly, now please if your christian, i have all of the respect in the world for you, for i myself used to be one. I was merely pointing out a view of life from a non religious standpoint on how morals origanated.

Now onto the statement at hand...

If you look at this one dimensionaly, suicide is not wrong. But we have more than just an X factor, we have both a Y and Z. Thus say you have family, but things are just going too bad, and you commit suicide, ok your family is now distraut at your death and youve caused years of pain and sorrowfull memories for them. Well now lets say all your family is dead or have disowned you and deny your existance, and you commit suicide, personaly i believe there should always be the will to make better of what you have, and biologically the basic nature of every living creature on earth is this, "Survive at all costs." that my friends is the nature of your being, now when you have a wife, she may become part of your being, thus somehow sacrificing yourself for her would be an attempt to save the majority. But back to the subject on human nature, look at history, just because the US had an economic depression, did that mean just because we lost all hope and all connections we should give up? no, it's because chance is always a factor, you never have a 0% chance of an occurance happening, thus entering the Z factor, the human psyche is incredibly complex, and every aspect around that being effects their psyche a great deal. I do not believe 99% of the people on medicines such as prozac, have actual depression, i very near garuntee if you gave every prozac user a plasebo, only a handfull would actualy fall back into depression because they do indeed have a chemical imbalance. I am saying this, to proove that just because you think all hope is lost, doesnt mean it is indeed lost....

and personaly i believe suicide to be murder, which is illegal. And to point out, my religious beliefs do not constrain anything against suicide, this is merely my perception on how reality is to me, that suicide is giving up and being a coward and shunning your own face in front of your fears.
 
1 - 2 of 2 Posts
Top