> If there is no God and therefore no reward or punishment because there is no afterlife, how can there be such a thing as right and wrong?
Because right and wrong do not need to be related to a fear of punishment, in this life or any other. In simplest and simplistic terms, "right" morally is that which provides the best chance for your genes to propogate. Thus murder is out, because people will come kill you for it; rape is out for the same reason. I've yet to come across a bit of (generally accepted) morality that can't be defined in this way.
Non responsive answer.
In simplest and simplistic terms, "right" morally is that which provides the best chance for your genes to propogate.
Nonsense. A thing can be correct or incorrect for a specific purpose, but morality isn't part of it.
Thus murder is out, because people will come kill you for it; rape is out for the same reason.
Incorrect. Getting CAUGHT for murder is out. Getting CAUGHT for rape is out. What you are saying basically means murder and rape are acceptable if you can get away with them.
I've yet to come across a bit of (generally accepted) morality that can't be defined in this way.
You haven't tried very hard.
If I have devised a fool-proof way to steal X dollars from somebody - my employer, the old person that I know, the government, whoever - and I know that it can't be traced to me, what do I do?
I've got a heck of a lot better chances of propagating my genes with cash than without, eh?
How about euthanasia?
Thats why you fellows couldn't get elected dog catcher if you didn't lie about your beliefs.
Actually, the best bet would be to surround yourself with a group of like minded tough m#####f#####rs who will defend you but support your desire to murder and rape.
An ideal society would be one in which those on the inside protect each other, but take whomever they want on the outside to impregnate. Thus they have complete control to spread their seed wherever they wish.
Murder would be tolerated - actually fights to the death - to ensure the society remained strong.
This bit of defending the weak and poor is about as stupid as anything I have ever seen or heard. It's a disgenics program and it needs to be abandoned. The weak and poor are to be used to allow the strong and rich to propagate.
Shalom.
How about the German who hides Jews from the Nazis? Where's the evolutionary benefit in that act? The German is placing his life in tremendous peril. Or is that not a moral act?