If you are a non- believer, why be moral when no one is looking?

If you are a non- believer in, all that you do is being recorded in the heavens, why be moral when no one is looking?

If there are no records and no witness, why not do anything you want?


If no one sees you do it, then is it a deed not done?


If all of this is true, then why do we have a conscience, where did it come.


We are told in scriptures that our conscience is our natural way of doing God's will in the absence of his Law.

Views: 4048

Replies are closed for this discussion.

Replies to This Discussion

It's literally the moral development stage of a child.

So true.  Thanks for breaking it down like that.  I've never heard it put quite so clearly. 

Religion takes its morality (twisted though it becomes) from humanity's innate moral behavior, which is an outgrowth of our development as a social species. It's typical of religion to take credit for something which it appropriated from earlier development.

The operative is still a conscience, which has been euphemized  in many ways on many posts on this thread. The question is still begged, where did it come from given that the driver of evolution is survival of the fittest. And since we share 97 percent of our DNA with primates and our common ancestor, allegedly is not that far back in the paleontological record. What is the mechanism to lay down such complex circuitry in the frontal lobes over such a small expands of time. Having 97 percent of our DNA already established.

I think we had enough time.  100,000 years is a lot of human generations and I don't fully accept your assertion that human conscience is unique from the internal process occurring for individuals within any social order, be it a pack of dogs, a gaggle of geese, or a sisterhood of nuns.  As I see it, Homo sapiens had 100,000 years to "humanize" our version of conscience/social order, which is probably somewhat derivative, like that 97% of our DNA...


"From this [Sarich and Wilson] calculated that the divergence of the lineages that led to humans and African great apes occurred 4.2 million years ago.  Subsequent refinements place the date somewhere between 10 and 5 million years by most estimates. (Kumar and Hedges 1998; Kumar et al. 2005; Holmes et al. 1989; Chen and Li 2001; Arnason et al. 2000; Pillbeam and Young 2004; Patterson et al. 2006; Glazko and Masatoshi 2003; Stauffer et al 2001)"  This quote comes from page 257 of "Evolution: The First Four Billion Years" by Ruse & Travis in the section Human Evolution, by Henry M. McHenry (no McJoke).   


McHenry writes that "larger-brained species of archaic Homo begin to appear in Africa by 600,00  years ago and in Eurasia somewhat later (Clark et al. 1994)." (p. 267)


"H. sapiens appears first in Africa sometime before 100,000 years ago (Klein 1999, 2000)." (p. 267)



Well said, if you can provide the transitional forms between well established species. There is clearly a dearth in the paleontological record.

You claim to be educated, yet you don't even understand what "survival of the fittest means" (or worse, you're deliberately trolling by pretending to be obtuse). So how can we trust that you understand anything else about evolution?


You're just a typical creationist parroting things you read on creationist websites. If you're presented with a transitional fossil (your irrational obsession of them is very telling btw) you'll simply apply Zeno's Paradox and demand a transitional fossil between that and another fossil. Repeat ad infinitum



This technique of first questioning the understanding of the subject, followed by derogatory remarks must be a script on this site. 

No I am not troll and yes I am degreed in the subject matter. 

Again... WHAT is your degree [specifically] and WHERE did it come from? You may very well have a degree... BUT if it did not come from a credible college, then it is [in some ways] worse than not having one.

Hone your reading skills and you will not only find out what degrees I have on this tread, but my IQ also. RIF READING IS FUNDAMENTAL!.

Unlike at least one other on this list, you have not provided objective confirmation of these degrees, not explained how they give you any expertise in the field of evolution or biblical studies.  Your writing attests that you are not an expert in either field, but have absolutely no insight into your deficits.  This is not consistent with your claim to have studied U.S. college level biology as at least a minor.  I would find it easier to believe that you studied this science at remedial GED level.

According to you, your IQ was self-determined on the basis of internet "know your own IQ" sites.  This method of determining an IQ is extremely unreliable and subject to all kinds of biases.  Your writing and thinking skills do not accord with the IQ you insist you have. 


In any case, this is being used as a fallacious "argument from unsupported authority". 

For the third time supply your list of citations supporting your claim that scientist have evidence that a conscience is present in lower species. And may they be peer reviewed sources. Give me your e-mail and I will supply you with all that you request if you can supply a statement of confidentiality.

  1. ISBN 0-1401-87650. pp. 95, 103, 106, 116, 126.
  2. ^ Anonymous. "Wild Justice and Fair Play: Animal Origins of Social Morality" (PDF). Retrieved 2007-01-16.
  3. ^Linden, Eugene (2000). The Parrot's Lament: And Other True Tales of Animal Intrigue, Intelligence, and Ingenuity. New York: Plume. ISBN 0452280680.
  4. ^Von Kreisler, Kristin (1999). The Compassion of Animals: True Stories of Animal Courage and Kindness. Rocklin, Calif.: Prima. ISBN 0761518088.
  5. ^ Gisela Kaplan. Australian Magpie: Biology and Behaviour of an Unusual Songbird. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood. 2004. pp. 83, 124.



© 2018   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service