Morality: Opposing Viewpoints
...ent my reasons for believing that we do not need God or any religious conception to support our moral convictions.” He feels in a Godless world, a person can continue to make moral decisions, be happy, and show love and companionship. He feels a person needs to act moral a wanting to be nice or respect a person as an individual, not because of the threat of going or not going to heaven or hell because they don’t exist. Nielsen felt a person can be moral by choice without being compelled by a higher force. Both authors disagree on morality and what it is subservient or dependent on. George Mavrodes goes back and forth but the reader has to believe morals are dependent of the existence on God, whereas Kai Nielsen feels morals are not based on the existence of God or an individual’s acknowledgement of God existing. Nielsen contends that living in a world where God does not exist will have grounds for individuals to practice good will or do what is morally just. After reading both authors work, I feel Kai Nielsen’s position on morality is correct. I feel an individual can act morally or what is deemed moral without the presence of God. Nielsen points out excellent reasons to support his position, whereas Mavrodes goes the topic instead of getting to the point. Nielsen explains an individual can thrive and act moral in a Godless world as long as they have the will and drive. He explains the same experiences, beliefs, values we learn in a world where God exist, can also be experienced in world where God does not exist. He shows the buck does not stop at God. Life is not dependent on if God is here or not. Nielsen goes on to say “even the man who has been deprived of that which could give him some measure of happiness can still find or make for himself a meaningful human existence.” I believe if God did not exist a person would develop morals and want to be kind to their fellow man. It is up to the individual to decide if they want to act moral or what we deem is immoral. An individual should not be bound by an obligation such as religion to want act morally. I person should want to do something because in their heart they know it is right. Blessings should not be an incentive or the ulterior motive for morality. A person should not have to act differently because God cease to exist. For instance, a parent told a child to go steal something and the child did it because the bible tells them to honor thy mother and thy father so your will not be numbered. With non-existence of God a child should be able to make their own decision to decipher what is morally right to them in that particular situation. In observing different cultures that do not believe God exist an individual can act moral and not uncivili...