= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
TheOtherDave comments on A Rationalist's Tale - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (305)
You sort of glossed over this, but it seems like the bit that a lot of people have trouble with (and have trouble realizing that it's even possible). There are lots of arguments for this position, but I'm just curious if there were any particular things that were "Aha" moments for you here.
ETA: Do you think you could have come to this position before rejecting God? That you could have said "even though there is a God, it would still be possible to be moral and happy and purposeful if there weren't"? I'm curious how easy it is to get people to realize this before it's their last resort for preserving morality etc.
I know plenty of religious folk who freely acknowledge that there exist non-religious moral folk, and accept that it follows that belief in God (as they understand God) is not crucial to living a moral life.
Mostly they seem to have arrived at that conclusion by observing the behavior of other people who don't share their understanding of God, and concluding that it sure does seem moral to them.
That said, I also know religious folk who have made that same observation and conclusion, but nevertheless continued to believe that there is no living a moral life without sharing their understanding of God, so it's by no means a given.