Is Morality possible without God


The issue, comically enough, is that moral bases proposed by secularists are vulnerable to exactly the same critiques use by those same secularists to set aside theism.

They usually realize this when they start pontificating/moralizing based on broad, nebulous ideas like “the trajectory of human experience” or some other vacuous tripe.

Has me in total fits. :joy::joy::joy:


Fine to be amused by the similarities you see. Not fine to copy bad behavior by speaking about others’ god in a derogatory manner.


Fine fine fine.

“Sorry” to all involved, including Damien.


Sounds like he is asking you a leading question. No doubt he already has an answer. You might both, first, define morality so that you have a common definition. I suspect you’ll have a very difficult time arriving at a definition you both will accept. But without that common ground, the discussion will be rather fruitless. Christian Morality has a s its foundation God’s own goodness and the goodness of all creation. That understanding of morality will certainly be a deal-breaker for your friend as it rather defeats the purpose of his question from the outset.


I’m not sure I understand the question. Existence isn’t possible without God. How could morality be possible without God? More to the point, what does morality even mean in the absence of God? Why wouldn’t each human be equally endowed with the authority to deem what is an is not moral, making it all a matter of opinion?

Does the person mean is it possible for a society to come to a code of morality and keep it if God were to refrain from bestowing the grace necessary for people to correctly form a conscience? The question has me confused.


I would argue that it is entirely subjective. How could it be otherwise. What would be the source of objective morality?

Why do I have a responsibility to other if that entails harm to me? What is the source of that responsibility, and why should I accept that it exists?

Does this mean you agree that I should consider only my own best interest in making decisions? And if not, why not?


How is referencing a deity’s position better? You have to first understand why they want you to do something and then you assess it to see if it is good or bad right? So what standard are you using to see if it is good or bad? We do this by assessing the goal of the situation. Some commands are amoral, that is, don’t have anything to do with moral issues. They are benign. Others are not. So any commandment that affects people, you use the reference of Human Well-Being to see if it is a moral commandment or not. If you are not ever going to think about this entity’s commandments, then you are no longer being a morally thinking individual and are just obeying the commandments. You are jumping off the couch just because the dear leader told you to, but you never assess the situation to understand why you should or if it is a bad or good reason to do that. Just bypass your deity as a reference and just assess situations as we all do. If you don’t know if you landed on a good or bad action as a result, then ask your deity to have a conversation with you to explain which is which. But I’d bet my house that you don’t hear anything back but white noise. You will from people though.


No, it means both you and I refer to our morality and allow that to influence our behaviour, and neither of us considers only our own best interest. We believe we should do this because our morality tells us so. And our morality is produced primarily by empathy.


The huge difference is that secularists are much more open to progression of said experience, instead of relying on “set in stone” ideas which eventually move forward, but with unnecessary suffering.


My counter is how obviously malleable religion is. Compare 13th century Catholicism to 21st century Catholicism or Hinduism across all its wild developments.

I don’t see how any secularist can say it’s “set in stone”.


Set in stone, relative to secularist thought. Gay rights would probably be the modern example.


On that particular example I’d be pretty quick to remind you of the secular arguments against the normalization of homosexual behavior.

Homosexuality in sexually reproducing species is an anomaly. I don’t need a god to tell you that.


I agree, but it is still a human rights issue. Golden rule based.


Eh, Golden Rule is an amplifier. It supports Right of Might as well as your gentler concepts of humanism. Not really a morality unto itself.


Yes, morality is possible without the existence of G-d, just as different kinds of belief in G-d, i.e. religions, have their own variations in morality. People have to decide for themselves what is moral and what is not, just as religion decides. It is often rather complicated in the real world and in extreme situations, as we can see in moral dilemma problems. Essentially, whatever personal moral values one adopts are an individual choice and whatever moral values a given society or culture adopts are based not only on religion but on common human values and norms of behavior, including justice, fairness, compassion, equity, as well as legal rules and regulations that bind a society or culture together.


I haven’t referenced a deity. I asked a very specific question for which I am not getting a very specific answer.

Why should I not always and in every situation do whatever I perceive to be in my best interest?

This is not helpful. In trying to decide what my moral views ought to be, why should I not decide on whatever is in my best interest?

If I decide to always act in my best interest is there any way to assert that this is not as moral a system as anyone elses?


Objective morality is an impossible without a higher authority. That should be self-evident. Throughout history there have been cultures that believe in human sacrifice and the like, and in our culture now you see that many people believe things that are sins to be morally neutral or even good. So the answer has to be No.


I believe you are, sometimes it benefits the society and friends as well sometimes it doesn’t because you have determined that somethings supersede what is in the best interest of others as they understand it. The group may believe that child brides are in the best interest for them or advocating against birth control, but you may understand that is not actually in yours or their best interest. When this comes into conflict you have to discuss with everyone why this is the case. For group 1 they reference their holy texts while group 2 reference studies performed on individuals and groups of people for what creates the optimal practices for social and individual betterment. If you can’t convince either one who has a better point of reference, then you’re at an impasse and you keep hammering away at it until you work it out.


If acting in your best interest harms others, there is a way for society, as well as individuals, to assert that your behavior is not as moral as behaviors which do not harm others. We have laws, customs, cultures which make those assertions.

Besides, I’m sure you and I and most of us act in our best interest on a daily basis much of the time. Even adopting a particular religious belief and practicing it is no doubt in our best interest, is it not? So long as our best interest does not harm others, it is generally considered moral even if it is self-centered.


What do people do when they believe they have god on their side?
1: Force indigenous children into religious schools after being kidnapped from their tribe
2: Child brides
3: anti-science
4: Genital branding of infants
5: Holy Wars
6: Dark Ages
7: Stagnation of science and math progress
8: Women and children as property
9: Genocides
10: Protection of child rapists for church unity
11: Child sacrifice
12: Disownment of family members
13: etc.

People indulge in their darkest sides once they believe they are immune from prosecution from their deity or the state.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit