Tooth decay is the only reason to brush your teeth.
Imagine a kid who doesn’t want to brush. If they don’t brush their teeth those teeth are still there in the morning, so why would they ‘believe’ in tooth decay?
If my teeth never decayed, why would I brush them?
That’s the kid, a 12 year old who’s teeth are fine, even when he doesn’t brush. He can test that by skipping brushing every day. The consequences won’t catch up until their early twenties.
The only immediate reason to get into the habit of tooth brushing is because they’re told to do so, and if the lesson sticks then they don’t have to experience the consequence of tooth decay as they grow older. The decay isn’t a punishment dealt out as judgement for not following an arbitrary rule.
shouldn’t just start being a greedy asshole regardless.
Based on what? Greedy assholes have a great time! You certainly can’t simply assume that everyone has a moral core that aligns with your own and have that match reality.
Naturally good-hearted people don’t need compassion explained to them, if only everyone was like that, right? The suggestion ‘learn to get along with people while you’re alive or you never will’ is certainly true whether there’s an afterlife or not, but if there is then it’s even more compassionate to try to give greedy assholes a framework and a reason to try something else.
Imagine a kid who doesn’t want to brush. If they don’t brush their teeth those teeth are still there in the morning, so why would they ‘believe’ in tooth decay?
Even a kid will eventually get cavities if they don’t brush, and cavities hurt. Children also learn from their parents about tooth decay. Again, how is this relevant? Are you saying all people are children that can’t tell right from wrong without being told?
Based on what? Greedy assholes have a great time! You certainly can’t simply assume that everyone has a moral core that aligns with your own.
Sure, but once again, what does this have to do with the Bible and the afterlife? I’m agnostic and I derive my morals by studying the philosophy of ethics. And a big part of ethics is firstly understanding science so you can separate fact from fiction. If you don’t know what is true, how can you know what is moral?
Even a kid will eventually get cavities if they don’t brush, and cavities hurt.
Yes, eventually. That’s the key word. The whole point is that since the consequence and the action are so far removed from one another, it’s easy for a kid to either not care or simply not believe that it’s the truth. That’s why it’s important to have an adult step in and teach them about it before it becomes an issue.
Are you saying all people are children that can’t tell right from wrong without being told?
I am saying some people are like that, I mean, have you ever even met people before? Also to the point, many people are literally children who literally don’t have enough life experience to have a grasp of right from wrong and never get there without being explicitly taught in ways they’re willing to accept and understand. Your comment here makes me think you’re arguing in bad faith.
Sure, but once again, what does this have to do with the Bible and the afterlife? … If you don’t know what is true, how can you know what is moral?
The part where this connects to the bible and the afterlife is that Jesus attempted to give a compassionate moral framework to people who weren’t being taught that by any one at all. He’s the Louis Pasteur of the soul and you’re speaking as if the knowledge of bacteria was always self evident to anyone who cared to think about it for a minute.
If morality was objective and deterministic the Trolley problem would not exist. Many people simultaneously know what is true and choose to act in an immoral way for their own satisfaction. They often end up wildly successful in doing so as well, just open the news! Morality is completely subjective. For many people being a good person is hard when it feels like it’s going against their own self interest and part of being empathetic is understanding this dichotomy. The connection with the bible and the afterlife is a logical attempt to tie self interest back into moral behavior by stating that the reward for it kicks in after death, as it’s painfully obvious that moral behavior does not universally feed back into self interest for those of us who are still alive.
The part where this connects to the bible and the afterlife is that Jesus attempted to give a compassionate moral framework to people who weren’t being taught that by any one at all. He’s the Louis Pasteur of the soul and you’re speaking as if the knowledge of bacteria was always self evident to anyone who cared to think about it for a minute.
If your point is that Jesus taught good morals to people, then I agree, assuming you can even trust that those stories from the Bible are true. Although I think it’s wrong to assume Jesus was the first person to teach a similar moral framework. The Golden Rule existed and was taught broadly long before Jesus ever lived.
But I believe the point you are arguing is stronger than that. From your first comment, it sounded like your point is that believing in an afterlife is critical to discovering morality, and that is a teaching of the Bible (and Jesus?) which I disagree with.
The Golden Rule is a wonderful thing IMO, at least as a principle to be used with judgement. But the religious baggage can be shed without losing the value of that moral principle; I don’t need to believe in Christianity or an afterlife to agree with the Golden Rule.
it sounded like your point is that believing in an afterlife is critical to discovering morality, and that is a teaching of the Bible (and Jesus?) which I disagree with.
My point was more or less the other way around; believing in an afterlife makes discovering morality critical. Morality exists independently and is valued independently of the afterlife.
If there happens to be an afterlife it would be excellent if it self sorted the groups into similar personality types, where the moral get to hang out together and be moral while the immoral spend time tearing one another to shreds.
If there isn’t an afterlife but life has been satisfactory that’s probably the best bet for a pleasant transition into oblivion; satisfying memories and a willingness to let go of earthly attachments would go strongly towards keeping ones final moments from being an anxious wretched mess.
Imagine a kid who doesn’t want to brush. If they don’t brush their teeth those teeth are still there in the morning, so why would they ‘believe’ in tooth decay?
That’s the kid, a 12 year old who’s teeth are fine, even when he doesn’t brush. He can test that by skipping brushing every day. The consequences won’t catch up until their early twenties.
The only immediate reason to get into the habit of tooth brushing is because they’re told to do so, and if the lesson sticks then they don’t have to experience the consequence of tooth decay as they grow older. The decay isn’t a punishment dealt out as judgement for not following an arbitrary rule.
Based on what? Greedy assholes have a great time! You certainly can’t simply assume that everyone has a moral core that aligns with your own and have that match reality.
Naturally good-hearted people don’t need compassion explained to them, if only everyone was like that, right? The suggestion ‘learn to get along with people while you’re alive or you never will’ is certainly true whether there’s an afterlife or not, but if there is then it’s even more compassionate to try to give greedy assholes a framework and a reason to try something else.
Even a kid will eventually get cavities if they don’t brush, and cavities hurt. Children also learn from their parents about tooth decay. Again, how is this relevant? Are you saying all people are children that can’t tell right from wrong without being told?
Sure, but once again, what does this have to do with the Bible and the afterlife? I’m agnostic and I derive my morals by studying the philosophy of ethics. And a big part of ethics is firstly understanding science so you can separate fact from fiction. If you don’t know what is true, how can you know what is moral?
Yes, eventually. That’s the key word. The whole point is that since the consequence and the action are so far removed from one another, it’s easy for a kid to either not care or simply not believe that it’s the truth. That’s why it’s important to have an adult step in and teach them about it before it becomes an issue.
I am saying some people are like that, I mean, have you ever even met people before? Also to the point, many people are literally children who literally don’t have enough life experience to have a grasp of right from wrong and never get there without being explicitly taught in ways they’re willing to accept and understand. Your comment here makes me think you’re arguing in bad faith.
The part where this connects to the bible and the afterlife is that Jesus attempted to give a compassionate moral framework to people who weren’t being taught that by any one at all. He’s the Louis Pasteur of the soul and you’re speaking as if the knowledge of bacteria was always self evident to anyone who cared to think about it for a minute.
If morality was objective and deterministic the Trolley problem would not exist. Many people simultaneously know what is true and choose to act in an immoral way for their own satisfaction. They often end up wildly successful in doing so as well, just open the news! Morality is completely subjective. For many people being a good person is hard when it feels like it’s going against their own self interest and part of being empathetic is understanding this dichotomy. The connection with the bible and the afterlife is a logical attempt to tie self interest back into moral behavior by stating that the reward for it kicks in after death, as it’s painfully obvious that moral behavior does not universally feed back into self interest for those of us who are still alive.
If your point is that Jesus taught good morals to people, then I agree, assuming you can even trust that those stories from the Bible are true. Although I think it’s wrong to assume Jesus was the first person to teach a similar moral framework. The Golden Rule existed and was taught broadly long before Jesus ever lived.
But I believe the point you are arguing is stronger than that. From your first comment, it sounded like your point is that believing in an afterlife is critical to discovering morality, and that is a teaching of the Bible (and Jesus?) which I disagree with.
The Golden Rule is a wonderful thing IMO, at least as a principle to be used with judgement. But the religious baggage can be shed without losing the value of that moral principle; I don’t need to believe in Christianity or an afterlife to agree with the Golden Rule.
My point was more or less the other way around; believing in an afterlife makes discovering morality critical. Morality exists independently and is valued independently of the afterlife.
If there happens to be an afterlife it would be excellent if it self sorted the groups into similar personality types, where the moral get to hang out together and be moral while the immoral spend time tearing one another to shreds.
If there isn’t an afterlife but life has been satisfactory that’s probably the best bet for a pleasant transition into oblivion; satisfying memories and a willingness to let go of earthly attachments would go strongly towards keeping ones final moments from being an anxious wretched mess.