"If God doesn't exist, everything is permitted."?

Forums: Philosophy, God, Morality, Dostoevsky
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Dostoevsky once said: "If God doesn't exist, everything is permitted."

My question is how did he reach to this conclusion? I mean this statement is NOT about whether we get our moral values from bible or other holy books(because even if someone hasn't read those books, he can still know that for example rape is immoral) and the other thing is that I think this statement is also NOT about whether those who don't believe in god can't be moral persons or can't do good deeds(because they simply can!)

long story short, I think this statement is referring to the foundation of morality; but as I said I can't understand how Dostoevsky reach to such a conclusion;

can someone elaborate please;

thanks in advance.

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Question • Score: 28 • Views: 12,470 • Replies: 150
Topic Closed

[+3] - Setanta - 05/13/2014How do you get that? Man has devised cures for smallpox. polio and tuberculosis. Man had developed effective regimes for treating typhus, typhoid fever and cholera. The invention of the...

@alphajoza,

God's non-existence really has no effect on human morality. Within a constructed society there are social constructed moralities that we collectively abide by and there are constructed moralities that we as a country we collectively abide by (state laws, federal laws etc).

2 Replies

@alphajoza,

http://standfirminfaith.com/?/sf/page/28086
...just one of the references on Googling "Dostoevsky morality"

0 Replies

@Buttermilk,

Indeed ! It can be argued that "God" is part of such a construction. But that has little to do with Dostoevsky and the context of the quotation.

0 Replies

@Buttermilk,

I am not sure I agree. Morals in the bible or the quaran are very different to the kind of morals man would engineer from a governmental perspective. Regardless of who wrote these books, if people were not afraid of upsetting a god, I believe we would have an altogether different set of morals. A lack of a god figure in society would make IMO a large difference to our current moral inclinations, specifically with regard to sexual morality.

1 Reply

Smileyrius wrote:

A lack of a god figure in society would make IMO a large difference to our current moral inclinations, specifically with regard to sexual morality.

Sheesh!

Trying to propagate such crap is a complete intellectual fraud!

Atheists are often more morally integer than lots of the religious zealots..

1 Reply

@timur,

I am not seperating atheists from theists. I am talking about a world with no god concept. I know of many moral atheists too, however mans moral construct has been heavily influenced by the god concept, whether true or not.

Do you disagree?

0 Replies

@alphajoza,

i would not giv it much thought it's a non sequitur

0 Replies

@alphajoza,

it also could be an appeal to emotive.
he might hav a political agenda

0 Replies

@alphajoza,

There are a number of philosophies regarding voluntary restrictions of human behavior. Social Contract, Enlightened Self Interest are but 2. Google either one for a more complete list.

What I find interesting is they are all human attempts to satisfy the promise made by the serpent in Genesis chapter 3 that humans can make their own decisions about good and bad. And, while the attempts may seem at first meritorious, 6000 years of reality have shown their failure. I, for one, am reassured by the full text of that chapter, promising an end to the rebellion and restoration of the Creator's purpose.

1 Reply

@neologist,

ur second paragraph is non sequitur reasoning.

1 Reply

@sunyata,

No. It's just opinion

1 Reply

@neologist,

an opinion which is reasoned fallaciously

1 Reply

@sunyata,

OK
Point out fallacy

1 Reply

@neologist,

they are all human attempts --- to satisfy the promise made by the serpent in Genesis...
how are they? theres a gap

0 Replies

@Smileyrius,

Um apparently God is always upset thus the continuance of seeking forgiveness because religionist believe human perfection is continually transgressing God's laws. I tend to like man's laws. Society believes intentional murder is wrong, intentional thievery is wrong, but as long as you abide by those laws you stay outta prison.

3 Replies

@Buttermilk,

What do you mean by human perfection? I see humans as anything but.

1 Reply

@neologist,

Typo...I meant imperfection

1 Reply

@Buttermilk,

Society believes intentional murder is wrong, intentional thievery is wrong,
this is a false fact.
e.g. the spartans and spartan like society's

0 Replies

@Buttermilk,

OK. But no matter how much we may like man's laws, they really have failed to solve man's real problems.

3 Replies

"If God doesn't exist, everything is permitted."?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know