How do agnostics live? (Introduction)

by Mark , Friday, June 27, 2008, 17:22 (5991 days ago) @ dhw

dhw: "All the scenarios are, of course, absurd, but the others (fat man and medical research) have added complications (ditto the new rape scenario) and if I go into those, we will be sidetracked from our real issue, which is my interpretation of humanist ethics versus your interpretation of Christian ethics."
I don't think the fat man and medical research are sidetracks. I would be very interested to know your view on them. They are related to the point of my first torture scenario, which is to try to show that a simple maximization of human happiness is inadequate. You constantly mention the 6 billion. The numbers seem to matter. I also think the rape scenario was helpful to consider as it supported my point, with my modification of it. It also helps to focus the original torture scenario as a child rape. However, I agree we can only go so far down any track before it seems more helpful to try a new angle of discussion. - You ask me why I do good.
dhw: "If God wants us to do good, who do we do good to? I can only measure good and bad in terms of the happiness, relief of suffering, welfare etc. of myself and my fellow creatures."
I can understand what you are saying, and to a degree I think this drives us all. But I would say it is inadequate simply because a lot of the time we are not able to determine the consequences of our actions. It makes for a rather short term view. It is not surprising that we differ on this since I have an eternal perspective. If all I were interested in was maximizing happiness, then I couldn't be sure that murder is always wrong or honesty always right. I need principles to live by. Raskolnikov thought the world would be better off without the pawnbroker in Crime and Punishment. Consequentialism is not enough. - dhw: "I have the impression that you are measuring good and bad against a raft of written prescriptions that are wide open to interpretation and centre on what the interpreters think might be what God wants."

Christianity is not simplistic. I'm not claiming that. It can be hard work for the church to know what is good, and, of course, even harder work to do it. Atheists have nothing like this discipline. Indeed, an interesting point is how atheists allow any disciplined formation of moral character. It isn't something that is "practised" in the way that Christianity is, with a pattern of prayer, reading, listening, community accountability.