It's a little like going to the gym, mentally watching your podcasts. No disrespect to Richard Dawkins, but I found your input lines up more easily with my own thoughts/views. I love no adverts, and even more so how you go straight to the conversation. You have another subscriber. One last observation; it saddens me to see so many mindless, trivial, and consumerism channels attracting millions of subscribers, when you only have 12k. What does this say about our society? Thank you for holding my interest for 7 minutes (unusual)
I always thought the eye for a eye tooth for a tooth wasn't an instruction to revenge but a rule to stop over reaction in retaliation. It was putting limits on recompense of wrongs done towards you. If i took your eye out..im sure your anger and desire to get me back might well be to take both my eyes..Seems to me the silly old dim bronze age people in the desert knew far more about the nature of the humans than meme making youtube commenters of today .
I don’t agree. If you’re dictating moral behaviour, then why stop short by dictating to the people that they should limit their revenge to like-for-like damage, when you could dictate that revenge and like-for-like damage are in themselves amoral and barbaric?
@@fromthesouthofafrica6815 An eye for eye, tooth for a tooth originates from laws in the Code of Hammurabi a Babylonian legal text composed during 1755-1750 BC. The origins of Judaism lie in Bronze Age polytheistic Canaanite religion. The Bronze age was 1200 BC and 600 BC. The phrase/law predates Judaism.
You are right but incomplete. Eye for and Eye means there will be consequence to sin. If a poor man steals a phone, would you steal his phone which he doesn't have as restitution? His punishment is to be determined. In the Eye for an Eye, there was still a trial. I don't know what new modern man has added to the Judicial system except to make it less likely to convict a criminal.
Firstly, people talk about getting their morals from religion as opposed to non religious sources, as if religious texts came from somewhere devine and have nothing to do with human thought. That is not the case. These texts were written and created by human beings - that’s the source, nowhere else! With that in mind, where did humans get their morals from in the first place? I believe it has to do with evolution of the heard. We are a species who’s survival depends on inter-cooperation - a social species. For the survival of the individual as well as the species, we have learnt how to treat each other over the millennia to maximise our individual and collective survival. If you treat me bad, I treat you bad, if you treat me well, I treat you well - It’s as simple as that. So morals are an evolution of natural behaviour shaped by the environment and collective groups we live in to help us survive.
@@fromthesouthofafrica6815 Maybe I didn’t explain clearly enough. The reason to be moral is because it helps with your own prospects and your own odds of survival if you are not a threat to someone else - even more so if you are a benefit to them.
@darkmatter6714 Still not a sufficient justification in my opinion. If it was more beneficial to my community and wellbeing to hurt someone, would that be wrong. E.g. We are in Nazi Germany and a family decides to kill Jews to seize their wealth. Since our state has no problem, this family sess it as okay.
@@fromthesouthofafrica6815 And what did that kind of behaviour achieve for the Nazis? All it achieved was that the whole world ganged up on them and it led to their own destruction. That’s the wrong analogy for trying to prove your point. Long term survival of the species is best achieved by cooperation, help and community. Cooperation improves survival odds of the species. That’s why every species lives in herds. In fact, sometimes different species herd together. Zebra and Wildebeast graze together because one of them has better eyesight, whereas the other has better hearing. Between them, they can spot danger better than on their own.
@darkmatter6714 Long term survival of the species is a cop-out. When westerners committed genocide against Africans when they colonised Africa, did they ever truly pay any price for doing this. They paid nothing and got enriched. Claiming long term survival of our species as the basis of our morality I'd a farce when we look at history. Need I remind you that it wasn't the entirety of the world that opposed the Nazis, but mostly western nations. Africa and Asia did not play a large role in World War 2.
Of course there's been progress, even if it's small, today we live in a state of law. Human values have been evolving and today we live in societies with less inequality, slavery, discrimination and wars.
Crusades , inquisitions, witch burnings, pedophilia, 30 year Catholic vs Protestant war , constant conflict in Middle East over a « holy land » born of fiction and more
If you think we still don't have that dark level inside our brains, the need for bloodlust, you haven't been taking notice of the likes of the UFC. Yes, you're not allowed to kill your opponent any more, but spectacle gets as close as possible to that line. As for progress, I think it depends on your viewpoint.
A better question to ask Richard Dawkins is “why do you think the Old Testament morals are deplorable”? Or why is this things “good morality”? I feel like Richard Dawkins is literally using modern morality and just everything back in history was “bad, deplorable, horrendous” etc etc. Every buzzword that hardcore atheists like Dawkins use
@@omegaxx7777 lol, now from arrogant, you become delusional, there is no such thing as subjective morality. It s just something they made out of thin air to trick people. The most disgusting action still be considering as moral by people like you thanks to this subjective morality
i think morality is humans trying to not fuck each other up and keep socity functioning an amoral socity would not function well even for the strong and powerful a moral socity the strong and the weak live in harmony and benfit each other so long story short morality is not the same in every century its an unspoken rules to keep socity functioning and install trust between people
Evolved or God given? I've discussed now a few times in my own vids. You can be good without God. And you can be evil with God in your life. All religious wars have proven this. But does this battle of good vs non good come from a God vs the proverbial devil? Or dark force or whatever you want to call it. The argument can be given that it must come from a higher being and the argument can be given that it doesn't necessarily have to. As all atheists aren't in prison. Either way this argument can't be won by either side. Cheers,DCF
Did they guy asking questions take a few Valium before he started. He's going to fall over and fall asleep. He's slurring so badly. Not sure he's awake.
It is really a heartbreaking thing when you see an educated atheist person saying that morality in general is getting better compared to those bronze ages. As an African, is see how the Europeans tortured and committed genocide to any people who they deemed inferior. Even in the 20th century, look at how the Belgians murdered tens of millions of Congolese and what the British did in the apartheid regime. The 20th century is no better than the ages of bible era. Lex is right when he suggested that even in the current 21st century, people are not more moral, rather they are more distracted with technology. Look at USA in 2022, the Americans spent 136 billion dollars on their pets while millions of people died due to hunger in other countries of which most of them are being made unstable by Western governments who wants those countries' to remain a source of cheep and free resources which is also easy for exploitation.
We still make human sacrifices till this day and we wrap it up in Patriotic Jingles. Why would a man leave his family to go fight a war when he can just pack up his family and flee? Even the State kidnaps people and send them to war as we see in Ukraine. We engage in self sacrifice and forced sacrifice.
This is not true. The moral standard of a society is in the culture of that society. The proclamation that Religion is not the foundation of morality is a lie. Why does a state give workers 6 days of work and a day of rest? Why do people go to Religous events? Why all the religous holidays? Morality came to being from Religous definition of Good and Evil. From religous definition of Spirits. From religous definition of Godly and Satanic. From religous belief of punishment for sin. From religous definition of Dos and donts.
What about before the time of Jesus... Your imaginary God was watching from heaven as witches, homosexuals were stoned to death. Humans keeping other humans as properties and slaves.... For good 4000yrs he was having fun up in the sky. 2000 yes ago he came down, killed himself and yet no solution. The bible as any other religious book can't be taken as a literal truth. It's just a barbaric story.....
If you take broad view of history, it takes the same direction, whats wrong with this guy, if we take broad view of history, morality is worst than ever ...
Ones does not cherry pick the Bible, and one does not reject verses from the Bible, it's the Word of God. Morality is morality.....it cannot change. People change choose evil over morality, morality is fixed.
the oldest known declaration of human rights is “Is not this the fast that I have chosen? to loose the bands of wickedness, to undo the heavy burdens, and to let the oppressed go free, and that ye break every yoke?” - Isaiah 58 which predates the cyrus cylinder by a hundred years. morality comes from the Judeo-Christian god and he put it in everyone's hearts that they have a conscience. Is it a coincidence that in all throughout history the Judeo-Christian movement has spearheaded abolition, womens rights, free enterprise, freethinking, and just plain old fashioned FREEDOM?
It's a little like going to the gym, mentally watching your podcasts. No disrespect to Richard Dawkins, but I found your input lines up more easily with my own thoughts/views. I love no adverts, and even more so how you go straight to the conversation. You have another subscriber. One last observation; it saddens me to see so many mindless, trivial, and consumerism channels attracting millions of subscribers, when you only have 12k. What does this say about our society? Thank you for holding my interest for 7 minutes (unusual)
What only 12k subs?
The question was, "Where does morality come from?"
All Dawkins said - in a meandering, roundabout way - was, "morality is culturally relative."
“Good is a point of view.”
- Chancellor Palpatine
There's no morality. We only have empathy for our fellow human being which we got from evolution.
I always thought the eye for a eye tooth for a tooth wasn't an instruction to revenge but a rule to stop over reaction in retaliation. It was putting limits on recompense of wrongs done towards you. If i took your eye out..im sure your anger and desire to get me back might well be to take both my eyes..Seems to me the silly old dim bronze age people in the desert knew far more about the nature of the humans than meme making youtube commenters of today
.
I don’t agree. If you’re dictating moral behaviour, then why stop short by dictating to the people that they should limit their revenge to like-for-like damage, when you could dictate that revenge and like-for-like damage are in themselves amoral and barbaric?
Except, when the law was originally inacted, it was literal.
@@KermunistThat isn't true. If you look at Orthodox Judaism, you'll find revengeance condemned.
@@fromthesouthofafrica6815 An eye for eye, tooth for a tooth originates from laws in the Code of Hammurabi a Babylonian legal text composed during 1755-1750 BC.
The origins of Judaism lie in Bronze Age polytheistic Canaanite religion. The Bronze age was 1200 BC and 600 BC. The phrase/law predates Judaism.
You are right but incomplete. Eye for and Eye means there will be consequence to sin. If a poor man steals a phone, would you steal his phone which he doesn't have as restitution? His punishment is to be determined. In the Eye for an Eye, there was still a trial. I don't know what new modern man has added to the Judicial system except to make it less likely to convict a criminal.
Firstly, people talk about getting their morals from religion as opposed to non religious sources, as if religious texts came from somewhere devine and have nothing to do with human thought. That is not the case. These texts were written and created by human beings - that’s the source, nowhere else!
With that in mind, where did humans get their morals from in the first place? I believe it has to do with evolution of the heard. We are a species who’s survival depends on inter-cooperation - a social species. For the survival of the individual as well as the species, we have learnt how to treat each other over the millennia to maximise our individual and collective survival. If you treat me bad, I treat you bad, if you treat me well, I treat you well - It’s as simple as that.
So morals are an evolution of natural behaviour shaped by the environment and collective groups we live in to help us survive.
What you're saying still doesn't give us a reason to be moral beings.
@@fromthesouthofafrica6815 Maybe I didn’t explain clearly enough. The reason to be moral is because it helps with your own prospects and your own odds of survival if you are not a threat to someone else - even more so if you are a benefit to them.
@darkmatter6714 Still not a sufficient justification in my opinion. If it was more beneficial to my community and wellbeing to hurt someone, would that be wrong. E.g. We are in Nazi Germany and a family decides to kill Jews to seize their wealth. Since our state has no problem, this family sess it as okay.
@@fromthesouthofafrica6815 And what did that kind of behaviour achieve for the Nazis? All it achieved was that the whole world ganged up on them and it led to their own destruction. That’s the wrong analogy for trying to prove your point.
Long term survival of the species is best achieved by cooperation, help and community. Cooperation improves survival odds of the species. That’s why every species lives in herds.
In fact, sometimes different species herd together. Zebra and Wildebeast graze together because one of them has better eyesight, whereas the other has better hearing. Between them, they can spot danger better than on their own.
@darkmatter6714 Long term survival of the species is a cop-out. When westerners committed genocide against Africans when they colonised Africa, did they ever truly pay any price for doing this. They paid nothing and got enriched. Claiming long term survival of our species as the basis of our morality I'd a farce when we look at history. Need I remind you that it wasn't the entirety of the world that opposed the Nazis, but mostly western nations. Africa and Asia did not play a large role in World War 2.
Auschwitz, hiroshima, nagasaki, apartheid happened from an evolutionary standpoint a microsecond ago.
What progress is he talking about?
and they are what we should do if evolutionaty darwinism is true.
@@ceceroxy2227 based
Of course there's been progress, even if it's small, today we live in a state of law.
Human values have been evolving and today we live in societies with less inequality, slavery, discrimination and wars.
Crusades , inquisitions, witch burnings, pedophilia, 30 year Catholic vs Protestant war , constant conflict in Middle East over a « holy land » born of fiction and more
@@ceceroxy2227This is bullshit, absolute fucking bullshit, please elaborate
I just love listening to Richard.
If you think we still don't have that dark level inside our brains, the need for bloodlust, you haven't been taking notice of the likes of the UFC. Yes, you're not allowed to kill your opponent any more, but spectacle gets as close as possible to that line. As for progress, I think it depends on your viewpoint.
This guy hasn't seen modern day TORIES.......needs to get out more.....
basically without God, Morality becomes arbitrary. That's all i heard Richard Dawkins say
Always has been 🌎🧑🚀🔫🧑🚀
Spartan 117, I commend you.
A better question to ask Richard Dawkins is “why do you think the Old Testament morals are deplorable”? Or why is this things “good morality”? I feel like Richard Dawkins is literally using modern morality and just everything back in history was “bad, deplorable, horrendous” etc etc. Every buzzword that hardcore atheists like Dawkins use
The problem is he has no basis for morality, just trashes other systems while not providing any morality of his own.
@@hgbitner1403Nobody has a “basis” for their morality.
@@omegaxx7777 lol, you dont have basis for your morality doesnt mean other people don't. What a arrogant person
@@ngocthanhpham1310 your basis doesn’t hold any more weight than anyone else’s because morality is subjective
@@omegaxx7777 lol, now from arrogant, you become delusional, there is no such thing as subjective morality. It s just something they made out of thin air to trick people. The most disgusting action still be considering as moral by people like you thanks to this subjective morality
i think morality is humans trying to not fuck each other up and keep socity functioning an amoral socity would not function well even for the strong and powerful a moral socity the strong and the weak live in harmony and benfit each other so long story short morality is not the same in every century its an unspoken rules to keep socity functioning and install trust between people
Always enjoy Richard. Lex is great. He is a very deep thinker.
Wrong.
When RD talks about modern morality he does not mean Islamic morality.
How about modern football. Deriving pleasure of men battering themselves or mma or enjoying nascar crashes
Is it immoral for a tiger to kill another tiger or is it just evolutionary behaviour.
Tough Question??
He's being nice as to not insult his questioner's intelligence.
So shall I.@@paulagwhyte1720
He confuses morality with laws.
That was... totally incoherent...
Evolved or God given? I've discussed now a few times in my own vids. You can be good without God. And you can be evil with God in your life. All religious wars have proven this. But does this battle of good vs non good come from a God vs the proverbial devil? Or dark force or whatever you want to call it. The argument can be given that it must come from a higher being and the argument can be given that it doesn't necessarily have to. As all atheists aren't in prison. Either way this argument can't be won by either side. Cheers,DCF
Dan Carlin Painfortainment is a hard listen!
Did they guy asking questions take a few Valium before he started. He's going to fall over and fall asleep. He's slurring so badly. Not sure he's awake.
It is really a heartbreaking thing when you see an educated atheist person saying that morality in general is getting better compared to those bronze ages. As an African, is see how the Europeans tortured and committed genocide to any people who they deemed inferior. Even in the 20th century, look at how the Belgians murdered tens of millions of Congolese and what the British did in the apartheid regime. The 20th century is no better than the ages of bible era.
Lex is right when he suggested that even in the current 21st century, people are not more moral, rather they are more distracted with technology. Look at USA in 2022, the Americans spent 136 billion dollars on their pets while millions of people died due to hunger in other countries of which most of them are being made unstable by Western governments who wants those countries' to remain a source of cheep and free resources which is also easy for exploitation.
And you Africans torture animals so shut up.
yeah, but can you explain jerry springer show.
We still make human sacrifices till this day and we wrap it up in Patriotic Jingles. Why would a man leave his family to go fight a war when he can just pack up his family and flee? Even the State kidnaps people and send them to war as we see in Ukraine. We engage in self sacrifice and forced sacrifice.
From where do you get your "LOVE' from Richard? Love? How to LOVE?
Chemical reactions in the brain.
This is not true. The moral standard of a society is in the culture of that society. The proclamation that Religion is not the foundation of morality is a lie. Why does a state give workers 6 days of work and a day of rest? Why do people go to Religous events? Why all the religous holidays? Morality came to being from Religous definition of Good and Evil. From religous definition of Spirits. From religous definition of Godly and Satanic. From religous belief of punishment for sin. From religous definition of Dos and donts.
“Cherry picking through Jesus”… As a Mormon cartoonist I see that too.
They must come from evolution. Best understanding comes from Dr Robert Sapolsky who is an expert on group biology.
From women obviously.
Definitely not
very powerful
I disagree with Dawkings. Jesus’ morality was practically perfect and that was 2000 years ago
so slavery just slipped gods mind
Jesus never existed
What about before the time of Jesus... Your imaginary God was watching from heaven as witches, homosexuals were stoned to death. Humans keeping other humans as properties and slaves.... For good 4000yrs he was having fun up in the sky. 2000 yes ago he came down, killed himself and yet no solution. The bible as any other religious book can't be taken as a literal truth. It's just a barbaric story.....
Even Jesus is exists doen'ts mean his moral is suitable for now.
lol good troll
If you take broad view of history, it takes the same direction, whats wrong with this guy, if we take broad view of history, morality is worst than ever ...
He sounds like a fool
Ones does not cherry pick the Bible, and one does not reject verses from the Bible, it's the Word of God.
Morality is morality.....it cannot change. People change choose evil over morality, morality is fixed.
the oldest known declaration of human rights is “Is not this the fast that I have chosen? to loose the bands of wickedness, to undo the heavy burdens, and to let the oppressed go free, and that ye break every yoke?” - Isaiah 58 which predates the cyrus cylinder by a hundred years. morality comes from the Judeo-Christian god and he put it in everyone's hearts that they have a conscience. Is it a coincidence that in all throughout history the Judeo-Christian movement has spearheaded abolition, womens rights, free enterprise, freethinking, and just plain old fashioned FREEDOM?