On Reward and Punishment

Without going in circles here -What is an appropriate pleasure? I assume your answer will be a pleasure that divine revelation allows us to engage in without there being any moral indescretion.Back to my original hypothesis - In this case your decision to act is ultimately driven by 2 alternatives.One would choose not to engage in forbidden pleasure out of love - the feeling of guilt or shame brought about by engaging in the illicit act would comparitively bring more distress and negative feelings than the pleasure brought about by sampling the forbidden fruits.OrOne acts out of fear of punishment - the short term benefit of the pleasure is outweighed by the potential negative benefit of receiving eternal punishment. For some this choice to follow the law also adds to one's chances of insuring eternal pleasure.So my original hypothesis still remains uncontested - we all act and make decisions based on the principle of maximum return - we weigh suffering vs pleasure and so act to come out on top. Regardless of what your decision is the motive was ultimately based on one's desires and the goal to come out ahead. We do nothing without gaining some type of benefit. Edited by Grizz, : No reason given.

I have already concluded thusly elsewhere.The only instance where I could say that we do anything without recompense is in a true act of love. Edited by anastasia, : No reason given.

You are the one defining pleasure as hedonism or self-indulgence, not I. However, sacrificing on any level for any reason perpetuates sacrifice. Our children are far closer than we imagine. They learn a way of being rather than a way of doing. Sacrifice is martyrdom. Is that who you are?

????

An act of love is an act of emotion. Emotions certainly motivate us to perform actions. However we only act if we believe this action will produce a benefit - either physical or psychological.An act is either an act or it isn't. There is no True act of love anymore than there is a True act of fear.

I don't know about all that. Why can't someone just act because they love? I mean, it may be rare...

Yes, that is how I used the expression 'a life of pleasure'. I don't know what this has to do with the topic, but yes, I am often a martyr when it comes to my children. It is not about 'being' but about doing what needs to be done.

I suppose matyrdom brings its own rewards. Whatever makes you happy, I guess.

But my whole question at the start of the post was why do we do anything at all? Why don't we just sit there like a tree stump? The anwswer is because we have an organ called a brain. This organ has been programmed to react to external and internal stimulii and impusles. Like any other living thing it does not react without an impulse. It demands payment for an action.I am not trying to negate the subjective importance of emotions and turn them into mechanical appendages without meaning. After all it is the emotions themselves that give our lives meaning and purpose. Regardless of who you are or what religion or creed or position you hold your emotions are the source of the joy and love and all those other nice things that for me are the foundation for an objective human morality. Our positive experiences and emotions are the basis of good - pain and suffering are evil.I am not a Christian. I respect your views and your right to hold them. Although I remain agnostic on the more general postion of a 'first cause' I do not hold a belief in a personal deity. What I see from many who do hold belief in divine revelation is the claim that without a religion one cannot live a moral life. My emotions of empathy,guilt, and shame keep me from killing, stealing, raping, ect. I could not live with myself in the morning. My brain would weigh the consquences and decide the payment for the actions is too small - the result is unbearable emotional pain. I am not denying the importance of Civil Law either. It certainly is needed to keep people from bringing pain and hardship on others as there are those who might not feel the payment is too small - potential guilt or remorse over stealing or killing would not be a sufficient impusle to negate the action. This is where the threat of suffering kind of evens it out and makes the payment potentiall a bit too much.Anyways Happy 4th to those here in the States. Speaking of brains I have a whopper headache today from losing a few brain cells last night.

This is some kind of tongue in cheek look-at-the-irony stuff that I find funny because I am fully aware of life's contradictions.I am only saying that martyrdom isn't always a state of mind, it can just be a necessity.

Personally I am more interested in understanding how it is that people make assumptions about what IS moral, before they go speculating about whether an agnostic is MORE moral.There are many threads past and present on the subject, and I believe it is a waste of time at this point to compare apples to oranges. You and I have different moral codes. Without religion, people don't lose morality, thet change what it entails.

I think this is an unfair question based on the circumstances you are presenting.I don't think you can take away heaven, and have all the other things that God created in us to remain.We were created to worship Him (our spirits) but our bodies want to party. That's the battle. Heaven is part of that equation, and your plan is less than perfect.But having said that, I feel inside of me a general notion to do good. Going to heaven, or how that's all gonna work, is only a faith thing anyway, so I can't prove that heaven exists. But that doesn't stop me, from having a conscience.

Why would a non believer such as an athiest or an agnostic not have a 'general notion' to do good as well? Having faith or holding religious beliefs is not the cause of having a conscience.

Why are you asking me?
What does that have to do with the OP?What do you think, I was always a believer?You seem like another person prejudice against Christians.

Not prejudice. Just skeptical of certain claims regarding the nature and origin of morality. I am just trying to further the discussion. My goal was to get people talking about what motivates us to behave the way we do with the hope that it would eventually lead to a discussion of issues such as morality.My contention is our system of morality is ultimately derived from our collective emotions. Many religious insitutions believe morality is revealed by and derived from divine revelation.