When you say there is evil, aren’t you admitting there is good?
When you accept the existence of goodness, you must affirm a moral law on the basis of which to differentiate between good and evil.
But when you admit to a moral law, you must posit a moral lawgiver.[
This document discusses theories of normative ethics including subjectivism, objectivism, and emotivism. Subjectivism claims that moral judgments are neither true nor false but depend on individual psychology. Objectivism claims moral judgments can be objectively true or false. The document outlines arguments for and against both subjectivism and objectivism. Emotivism, developed by David Hume, claims that moral judgments are emotional expressions of approval or disapproval rather than statements of fact.
Relationship between morality_and_religionTheAdipose
This document discusses the relationship between religion and morality from three perspectives:
1) Some argue morality depends on religion, deriving from sacred texts and religious authorities. However, others critique scriptural interpretations and question if fear motivates true goodness.
2) Others see morality as independent from religion, influenced instead by social conditioning. Sacred texts are culturally relative and stories like Abraham/Isaac challenge intuitive morality.
3) Some like Dawkins and Nietzsche oppose religion, seeing it as irrational and denying humanity's potential. Religion is argued to induce guilt rather than true morality.
This document discusses ethics, morals, and values. It defines ethics as the formal study of moral standards and conduct, addressing questions of good and evil. Morals are social and cultural beliefs about what is right and wrong. Values refer to life priorities and lifestyle choices. The document uses examples to illustrate these concepts and differentiate between morals and ethics. It also discusses how principles, whether moral or ethical, influence behavior and come from teachings and experts seeking to understand human nature.
Virtue ethics focuses on developing good moral character through practicing virtues, or good habits. There are two types of virtues - divine virtues like faith, hope and love that are gifts from God, and cardinal virtues like prudence, justice, fortitude and temperance that are acquired through practice. Developing virtues involves making good choices in daily life to become more perfected in imitating Christ.
Ethics is the philosophical study of morality and seeks to understand concepts like good, evil, right, wrong and justice. There are differing views on the source and nature of morality. Objectivists believe morality is objective and stems from supernatural beings or natural laws, while subjectivists see it as subjective and based on human rationality. Major ethical theories discussed include utilitarianism, deontology, virtue ethics and ethical relativism. Different theories provide various approaches to determining what constitutes moral and ethical behavior.
The document presents on ethical decision making by Rohit, an MBA student. It defines ethics as moral principles governing behavior and discusses how ethical decisions generate trust and demonstrate respect, responsibility and fairness. It defines ethical decision making as evaluating and choosing alternatives consistent with ethical principles. The process involves identifying ethical issues, collecting relevant information, evaluating it, generating possible actions, considering alternatives, making a decision, taking action, and reviewing the actions.
This document discusses several ethical theories and concepts related to using child labor:
- Consequentialism focuses on the consequences of actions and argues that using child labor could maximize benefits and utility. However, deontology argues it violates moral rules and principles of protecting children.
- Cultural relativism could defend child labor as a local cultural practice, but offers no way to evaluate practices or progress morally. Using child labor also fails tests of universalizability in Kantian ethics.
- Virtue ethics notes that using child labor fails to cultivate virtues of compassion and fairness, and damages children's development into moral exemplars. Overall, most major ethical theories condemn using child labor due to the harms inflicted on children.
This document discusses different philosophical perspectives on the concept of evil. It begins by outlining the deductive argument from evil, which argues that the existence of evil is logically incompatible with the existence of an omnipotent, omniscient, and perfectly good God. It then examines various theories that have attempted to resolve this incompatibility, such as the idea that some evils may be logically necessary for greater goods. The document also analyzes different formulations of the problem of evil, like axiological and deontological approaches. Finally, it explores specific theories of evil proposed by philosophers and thinkers like Kant, Arendt, and various dualist and privation theories.
This document discusses theories of normative ethics including subjectivism, objectivism, and emotivism. Subjectivism claims that moral judgments are neither true nor false but depend on individual psychology. Objectivism claims moral judgments can be objectively true or false. The document outlines arguments for and against both subjectivism and objectivism. Emotivism, developed by David Hume, claims that moral judgments are emotional expressions of approval or disapproval rather than statements of fact.
Relationship between morality_and_religionTheAdipose
This document discusses the relationship between religion and morality from three perspectives:
1) Some argue morality depends on religion, deriving from sacred texts and religious authorities. However, others critique scriptural interpretations and question if fear motivates true goodness.
2) Others see morality as independent from religion, influenced instead by social conditioning. Sacred texts are culturally relative and stories like Abraham/Isaac challenge intuitive morality.
3) Some like Dawkins and Nietzsche oppose religion, seeing it as irrational and denying humanity's potential. Religion is argued to induce guilt rather than true morality.
This document discusses ethics, morals, and values. It defines ethics as the formal study of moral standards and conduct, addressing questions of good and evil. Morals are social and cultural beliefs about what is right and wrong. Values refer to life priorities and lifestyle choices. The document uses examples to illustrate these concepts and differentiate between morals and ethics. It also discusses how principles, whether moral or ethical, influence behavior and come from teachings and experts seeking to understand human nature.
Virtue ethics focuses on developing good moral character through practicing virtues, or good habits. There are two types of virtues - divine virtues like faith, hope and love that are gifts from God, and cardinal virtues like prudence, justice, fortitude and temperance that are acquired through practice. Developing virtues involves making good choices in daily life to become more perfected in imitating Christ.
Ethics is the philosophical study of morality and seeks to understand concepts like good, evil, right, wrong and justice. There are differing views on the source and nature of morality. Objectivists believe morality is objective and stems from supernatural beings or natural laws, while subjectivists see it as subjective and based on human rationality. Major ethical theories discussed include utilitarianism, deontology, virtue ethics and ethical relativism. Different theories provide various approaches to determining what constitutes moral and ethical behavior.
The document presents on ethical decision making by Rohit, an MBA student. It defines ethics as moral principles governing behavior and discusses how ethical decisions generate trust and demonstrate respect, responsibility and fairness. It defines ethical decision making as evaluating and choosing alternatives consistent with ethical principles. The process involves identifying ethical issues, collecting relevant information, evaluating it, generating possible actions, considering alternatives, making a decision, taking action, and reviewing the actions.
This document discusses several ethical theories and concepts related to using child labor:
- Consequentialism focuses on the consequences of actions and argues that using child labor could maximize benefits and utility. However, deontology argues it violates moral rules and principles of protecting children.
- Cultural relativism could defend child labor as a local cultural practice, but offers no way to evaluate practices or progress morally. Using child labor also fails tests of universalizability in Kantian ethics.
- Virtue ethics notes that using child labor fails to cultivate virtues of compassion and fairness, and damages children's development into moral exemplars. Overall, most major ethical theories condemn using child labor due to the harms inflicted on children.
This document discusses different philosophical perspectives on the concept of evil. It begins by outlining the deductive argument from evil, which argues that the existence of evil is logically incompatible with the existence of an omnipotent, omniscient, and perfectly good God. It then examines various theories that have attempted to resolve this incompatibility, such as the idea that some evils may be logically necessary for greater goods. The document also analyzes different formulations of the problem of evil, like axiological and deontological approaches. Finally, it explores specific theories of evil proposed by philosophers and thinkers like Kant, Arendt, and various dualist and privation theories.
The document discusses the importance and nature of truth from a Christian perspective. It emphasizes that truth comes from God, Satan spreads lies, and we are called to be witnesses of truth. We should speak the truth in love, trust God even when things are confusing, and not be afraid because God will judge righteously.
Deontological Theories And Moral AutonomyAswin A V
Deontological ethics or deontology (from Greek δέον, deon, "obligation, duty"[1]) is the normative ethical position that judges the morality of an action based on rules.[citation needed]
It is sometimes described as "duty-" or "obligation-" or "rule-" based ethics, because rules "bind you to your duty."[2] Deontological ethics is commonly contrasted to consequentialism,[3] virtue ethics, and pragmatic ethics. In this terminology, action is more important than the consequences.
The term deontological was first used to describe the current, specialised definition by C. D. Broad in his book, Five Types of Ethical Theory, which was published in 1930.[4] Older usage of the term goes back to Jeremy Bentham, who coined it in c. 1826 to mean more generally "the knowledge of what is right and proper".[5] The more general sense of the word is retained in French, especially in the term code de déontologie "ethical code", in the context of professional ethic
The document discusses several frameworks for categorizing and thinking about ethics, including deontology vs. teleology (ethics based on duty vs. consequences). It provides examples of prominent philosophers who exemplified different approaches, such as Immanuel Kant supporting deontology by focusing on duty and the categorical imperative, and John Stuart Mill supporting teleology as a utilitarian who believed ethics is determined by producing the greatest good for the greatest number of people. The document also discusses other ethics classifications like direct vs. indirect views and pragmatic vs. humanistic theories.
Virtue ethics is an approach to ethics which emphasizes the character of the moral agent, rather than rules or consequences, as the key element of ethical thinking.
The document discusses morals, ethics, and key ethical concepts relevant to nursing. It defines morals as based on religious beliefs and social norms, while ethics refers to the standards and methods of a profession. Key ethical concepts for nursing discussed include autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, justice, fidelity, veracity, and rights. Autonomy involves respecting a patient's right to make their own decisions. Beneficence means doing good, while nonmaleficence means avoiding harm. Justice refers to fairness, and fidelity means fulfilling one's responsibilities.
This presentation is about ethics used in organizations. this a group presentation in which first 10 slides are made by me and other part is done by my team members.hope u like it !!!!
Virtues are morally good habits or character traits. Aristotle proposed a virtue theory where virtues develop through training and practice. According to Aristotle, virtues are states of character that allow one to act and feel appropriately. He argued that virtues are developed through habituation by families and communities. Some examples of virtues include courage, temperance, generosity, and honesty. For professionals, virtues can be categorized as self-direction virtues like humility and courage, public-spirited virtues like fairness and leadership, teamwork virtues like collegiality and cooperation, and proficiency virtues like competence and diligence.
This document introduces several ethical theories: Kantianism focuses on treating people as ends rather than means; utilitarianism evaluates actions based on their consequences and maximizing happiness; social contract theory proposes that individuals implicitly consent to moral rules for the benefit of society; and virtue ethics emphasizes cultivating moral character through habitually doing right actions. The document provides examples applying these theories to scenarios around plagiarism, highway construction, computer viruses, marketing practices, and more.
The document discusses the philosophies of hard determinism and libertarianism, with hard determinism denying free will and believing all actions are determined by prior causes, while libertarianism claims people are morally responsible for their choices and free to make undetermined decisions. It also examines the ideas of personality and moral self in libertarian thought.
This document outlines and compares several major ethical theories: relativism, which holds that moral principles depend on context rather than being absolute; divine command theory, which states that an action is morally right if God commands it; ethical egoism, which argues people should act in their own self-interest; utilitarianism, which evaluates actions based on their consequences and ability to produce happiness; and social contract theory, which views moral obligations as dependent on implicit agreements within a society. For each theory, the document presents key aspects of the view and potential arguments both for and against it.
Deontology is a duty-based ethical theory that focuses on acts being right or wrong based on whether they conform to moral rules and duties, rather than the consequences of the acts. Under deontology, the consequences of acts do not affect their morality - acts are prohibited if they violate rules of duty, even if they produce good outcomes. Some key aspects of deontology discussed in the document include it focusing on intention over consequences, certain choices being forbidden no matter their results, and the priority of doing the right act over producing good.
This document provides an overview of philosophy of religion. It defines philosophy of religion as the branch of philosophy that studies religion from a rational perspective, examining themes such as the existence and nature of God, religious experience, and the problem of evil. The document summarizes some of the main themes in philosophy of religion, including arguments for the existence of God, views on immortality, types of religious experience, and the nature of religious language. Philosophy of religion analyzes religious doctrines and experiences to investigate their metaphysical and epistemological implications.
This document provides an overview of virtue ethics from Aristotle to modern philosophers. It discusses Aristotle's concept of eudaimonia or human flourishing as the goal of ethics achieved through developing moral virtues like courage, justice, and temperance. Aristotle defined virtues as means between vices of excess and deficiency. Later virtue ethicists expanded on Aristotle's work, with some emphasizing narrative traditions or ethics of care. Strengths of virtue ethics include its focus on character, community, and long-term moral development, though weaknesses include vagueness and dependence on strong communities.
The document discusses several topics related to ethics and morality, including the importance of studying ethics, the role of culture and moral behavior, moral versus non-moral standards, the levels of moral dilemmas, and the development of moral character. Rules are important for regulating behavior and protecting rights, while morality involves making choices within one's cultural context. An individual's actions both shape and are shaped by their developing moral character.
This document discusses different philosophical theories about the relationship between minds and bodies/brains:
1) Dualism holds that minds are non-physical and distinct from bodies. Descartes argued for this view by claiming we can conceive of minds without bodies.
2) Behaviorism claims minds are just patterns of observable behavior and we need not refer to inner mental states.
3) Identity theory claims mental states just are brain states based on their correlations.
4) Functionalism views minds as programs running on brains or hardware.
Objections raised include how minds and bodies interact on dualism, behaviorism ignores inner states, and identity theory cannot account for the same mental state being realized by different brain states
The document discusses the basic nature of human beings and human skills. It describes how human skills differ between individuals and include things like communication, leadership, and personality. It discusses how human nature is based on character and temperament, which shape a person's core nature. While the surface can change, human nature itself does not. The document also examines the influence of heredity and environment on human nature and how both contribute to personality development. It outlines some basic dimensions of individual interactions in society, including primary dimensions like age, gender, and nationality and secondary dimensions like communication style and work experience.
This document provides an overview of ethics as a branch of philosophy concerned with concepts of right and wrong conduct. It discusses the major areas of ethics including meta-ethics, normative ethics, and applied ethics. Meta-ethics examines what right and wrong mean and whether moral propositions can be true or false. Normative ethics investigates standards for determining right and wrong actions. Applied ethics involves applying philosophical methods to specific moral issues. The document also discusses moral theories like consequentialism, deontology, and virtue ethics as well as challenges to ethics such as moral relativism.
This document discusses key questions in the philosophy of religion, including the nature of religious belief and language, arguments for and against the existence of God, and approaches to religious faith. It addresses whether talk of God refers to something real or is a way of talking about life, whether religious belief involves belief-that or belief-in, and whether arguments can demonstrate God's existence or faith is required. It also examines design and evolution, fine-tuning of the universe, religious experience and the problem of evil.
This presentation examines the moral argument for God and presents evidence that shows if God does not exist, then neither do objective moral values and duties.
Moral relativism asserts there is no absolute moral law, but rather that morality is relative to individuals and cultures. The document examines the claims of moral relativism and argues it cannot provide a satisfactory standard or authority for determining right and wrong. In contrast, the Christian worldview grounds objective morality in the transcendent God, who revealed His moral law for humanity's well-being. Without God, everything is permissible, as existentialists like Jean-Paul Sartre acknowledged.
The document discusses the importance and nature of truth from a Christian perspective. It emphasizes that truth comes from God, Satan spreads lies, and we are called to be witnesses of truth. We should speak the truth in love, trust God even when things are confusing, and not be afraid because God will judge righteously.
Deontological Theories And Moral AutonomyAswin A V
Deontological ethics or deontology (from Greek δέον, deon, "obligation, duty"[1]) is the normative ethical position that judges the morality of an action based on rules.[citation needed]
It is sometimes described as "duty-" or "obligation-" or "rule-" based ethics, because rules "bind you to your duty."[2] Deontological ethics is commonly contrasted to consequentialism,[3] virtue ethics, and pragmatic ethics. In this terminology, action is more important than the consequences.
The term deontological was first used to describe the current, specialised definition by C. D. Broad in his book, Five Types of Ethical Theory, which was published in 1930.[4] Older usage of the term goes back to Jeremy Bentham, who coined it in c. 1826 to mean more generally "the knowledge of what is right and proper".[5] The more general sense of the word is retained in French, especially in the term code de déontologie "ethical code", in the context of professional ethic
The document discusses several frameworks for categorizing and thinking about ethics, including deontology vs. teleology (ethics based on duty vs. consequences). It provides examples of prominent philosophers who exemplified different approaches, such as Immanuel Kant supporting deontology by focusing on duty and the categorical imperative, and John Stuart Mill supporting teleology as a utilitarian who believed ethics is determined by producing the greatest good for the greatest number of people. The document also discusses other ethics classifications like direct vs. indirect views and pragmatic vs. humanistic theories.
Virtue ethics is an approach to ethics which emphasizes the character of the moral agent, rather than rules or consequences, as the key element of ethical thinking.
The document discusses morals, ethics, and key ethical concepts relevant to nursing. It defines morals as based on religious beliefs and social norms, while ethics refers to the standards and methods of a profession. Key ethical concepts for nursing discussed include autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, justice, fidelity, veracity, and rights. Autonomy involves respecting a patient's right to make their own decisions. Beneficence means doing good, while nonmaleficence means avoiding harm. Justice refers to fairness, and fidelity means fulfilling one's responsibilities.
This presentation is about ethics used in organizations. this a group presentation in which first 10 slides are made by me and other part is done by my team members.hope u like it !!!!
Virtues are morally good habits or character traits. Aristotle proposed a virtue theory where virtues develop through training and practice. According to Aristotle, virtues are states of character that allow one to act and feel appropriately. He argued that virtues are developed through habituation by families and communities. Some examples of virtues include courage, temperance, generosity, and honesty. For professionals, virtues can be categorized as self-direction virtues like humility and courage, public-spirited virtues like fairness and leadership, teamwork virtues like collegiality and cooperation, and proficiency virtues like competence and diligence.
This document introduces several ethical theories: Kantianism focuses on treating people as ends rather than means; utilitarianism evaluates actions based on their consequences and maximizing happiness; social contract theory proposes that individuals implicitly consent to moral rules for the benefit of society; and virtue ethics emphasizes cultivating moral character through habitually doing right actions. The document provides examples applying these theories to scenarios around plagiarism, highway construction, computer viruses, marketing practices, and more.
The document discusses the philosophies of hard determinism and libertarianism, with hard determinism denying free will and believing all actions are determined by prior causes, while libertarianism claims people are morally responsible for their choices and free to make undetermined decisions. It also examines the ideas of personality and moral self in libertarian thought.
This document outlines and compares several major ethical theories: relativism, which holds that moral principles depend on context rather than being absolute; divine command theory, which states that an action is morally right if God commands it; ethical egoism, which argues people should act in their own self-interest; utilitarianism, which evaluates actions based on their consequences and ability to produce happiness; and social contract theory, which views moral obligations as dependent on implicit agreements within a society. For each theory, the document presents key aspects of the view and potential arguments both for and against it.
Deontology is a duty-based ethical theory that focuses on acts being right or wrong based on whether they conform to moral rules and duties, rather than the consequences of the acts. Under deontology, the consequences of acts do not affect their morality - acts are prohibited if they violate rules of duty, even if they produce good outcomes. Some key aspects of deontology discussed in the document include it focusing on intention over consequences, certain choices being forbidden no matter their results, and the priority of doing the right act over producing good.
This document provides an overview of philosophy of religion. It defines philosophy of religion as the branch of philosophy that studies religion from a rational perspective, examining themes such as the existence and nature of God, religious experience, and the problem of evil. The document summarizes some of the main themes in philosophy of religion, including arguments for the existence of God, views on immortality, types of religious experience, and the nature of religious language. Philosophy of religion analyzes religious doctrines and experiences to investigate their metaphysical and epistemological implications.
This document provides an overview of virtue ethics from Aristotle to modern philosophers. It discusses Aristotle's concept of eudaimonia or human flourishing as the goal of ethics achieved through developing moral virtues like courage, justice, and temperance. Aristotle defined virtues as means between vices of excess and deficiency. Later virtue ethicists expanded on Aristotle's work, with some emphasizing narrative traditions or ethics of care. Strengths of virtue ethics include its focus on character, community, and long-term moral development, though weaknesses include vagueness and dependence on strong communities.
The document discusses several topics related to ethics and morality, including the importance of studying ethics, the role of culture and moral behavior, moral versus non-moral standards, the levels of moral dilemmas, and the development of moral character. Rules are important for regulating behavior and protecting rights, while morality involves making choices within one's cultural context. An individual's actions both shape and are shaped by their developing moral character.
This document discusses different philosophical theories about the relationship between minds and bodies/brains:
1) Dualism holds that minds are non-physical and distinct from bodies. Descartes argued for this view by claiming we can conceive of minds without bodies.
2) Behaviorism claims minds are just patterns of observable behavior and we need not refer to inner mental states.
3) Identity theory claims mental states just are brain states based on their correlations.
4) Functionalism views minds as programs running on brains or hardware.
Objections raised include how minds and bodies interact on dualism, behaviorism ignores inner states, and identity theory cannot account for the same mental state being realized by different brain states
The document discusses the basic nature of human beings and human skills. It describes how human skills differ between individuals and include things like communication, leadership, and personality. It discusses how human nature is based on character and temperament, which shape a person's core nature. While the surface can change, human nature itself does not. The document also examines the influence of heredity and environment on human nature and how both contribute to personality development. It outlines some basic dimensions of individual interactions in society, including primary dimensions like age, gender, and nationality and secondary dimensions like communication style and work experience.
This document provides an overview of ethics as a branch of philosophy concerned with concepts of right and wrong conduct. It discusses the major areas of ethics including meta-ethics, normative ethics, and applied ethics. Meta-ethics examines what right and wrong mean and whether moral propositions can be true or false. Normative ethics investigates standards for determining right and wrong actions. Applied ethics involves applying philosophical methods to specific moral issues. The document also discusses moral theories like consequentialism, deontology, and virtue ethics as well as challenges to ethics such as moral relativism.
This document discusses key questions in the philosophy of religion, including the nature of religious belief and language, arguments for and against the existence of God, and approaches to religious faith. It addresses whether talk of God refers to something real or is a way of talking about life, whether religious belief involves belief-that or belief-in, and whether arguments can demonstrate God's existence or faith is required. It also examines design and evolution, fine-tuning of the universe, religious experience and the problem of evil.
This presentation examines the moral argument for God and presents evidence that shows if God does not exist, then neither do objective moral values and duties.
Moral relativism asserts there is no absolute moral law, but rather that morality is relative to individuals and cultures. The document examines the claims of moral relativism and argues it cannot provide a satisfactory standard or authority for determining right and wrong. In contrast, the Christian worldview grounds objective morality in the transcendent God, who revealed His moral law for humanity's well-being. Without God, everything is permissible, as existentialists like Jean-Paul Sartre acknowledged.
Subjectivism in EthicsJames Rachels&Stuart Rachels.docxpicklesvalery
Subjectivism in Ethics
James Rachels
&
Stuart Rachels
What are morals?
The Basic Idea of Ethical Subjectivism
People have different opinions, but where morality is concerned, there are no ‘facts,’ and no one is ‘right.’ People just feel differently, and that’s all there is to it.
What are moral truths?
Different from moral standards
Some Implications
It is a fact that the Nazis exterminated millions of innocent people.
According to ethical subjectivism, it is not a fact that what they did was objectively evil.
Some Implications
According to ethical subjectivism, when we say that the actions of the Nazis were evil, we are merely expressing our negative subjective feelings toward them.
The same applies to any moral judgment whatsoever.
The Evolution of the Theory
It began as a simple idea—in the words of David Hume (1711-1776), that morality is a matter of sentiment rather than fact. But as objections were raised to the theory, and as its defenders tried to answer the objections, the theory became more sophisticated.
The First Stage: Simple Subjectivism
When a person says that something is morally good or bad, this means that he or she approves of that thing, or disapproves of it, and nothing more.
Objections to Simple Subjectivism
Simple Subjectivism Cannot Account for Disagreement.
Moral statements simply reflect preference. We cannot disagree about what another person’s sincerely stated preference is.
Falwell: ʺHomosexuality is immoral. The so‐called ʹgay rightsʹ are not rights at all, because immorality is not right.ʺ
Subjectivist: “I agree.” (For the subjectivist, this merely means: “It is true that you have feelings of disapproval toward homosexuality.” The subjectivist’s own feelings are irrelevant .)
It's very dear to me, the issue of gay marriage. Or as I like to call it: marriage. You know, because I had lunch this afternoon, not “gay lunch”. I parked my car; I didn't “gay park” it.
Liz Feldman
We seem to experience actual disagreement with others about moral issues.
Objections to Simple Subjectivism
Simple Subjectivism Implies That We’re Always Right.
So long as people honestly represent their feelings, their moral judgments will always be correct and indisputable.
Falwell: “Homosexuality is immoral.”
Subjectivist: “You’re right.” (For the subjectivist, this still merely means: “It is true that you have feelings of disapproval toward homosexuality.” The subjectivist’s own feelings are irrelevant .)
We seem to acknowledge moral error in both ourselves and in others.
The Second Stage: Emotivism
Moral language is not fact-stating language; it is not used to convey information or to make reports. Charles L. Stevenson (1908-1979)
Moral language is instead used as a means of influencing other people’s behavior or expressing one’s own attitudes.
The Second Stage: Emotivism
Stevenson: “Any statement about any fact which any speaker considers likely to alte ...
Relativism and Medical Ethics Exploring the Nature of Trut.docxsodhi3
Relativism and Medical
Ethics
Exploring the Nature of Truth & Euthanasia
When in Rome, Do as Romans Do
What is Relativism?
Relativism grounds the truth of something in the individual. So that,
when we want to know whether or not something is right or wrong,
who has the final say so? The individual. One of the major goals of
relativism is that it seeks to take away harsh judgment and replace it
with tolerance and peace.
Some Positive Aspects About Relativism
Living in America, our culture is a melting pot. Relativism reminds us
that we should not take our standards as being obvious for others.
Relativism can raise the question of whether or not we believe
something because it's actually true, or just because we are
comfortable with it.
Another example could be that we should not think of ourselves as
morally (or in any other way) superior because of our technological
advances. The temptation may be that we look down on primitive
tribes as being simple and uneducated. However their convictions and
beliefs run as deep as ours.
There are many kinds of relativism. Ultimately, the main tenants of
relativism are that:
1 There are no objective truths.
2 Objective truths are those truths which are true even if no one wants
to believe it.
3 Relativism says that because all truths are determined by
themselves, their cultures, language, etc. that objective truths
are actually an illusion.
4 Even truths such as 2+2=4 isn't necessarily truth, other than the fact
that we have all agreed historically that it is true.
• Because of this, "Man is the measure of all things". No one person's
ethics is better than another's. But with this we have to mean
that my ethics is no better than someone who lived 1500 years
ago in another country. One is no better than the other, just
different. A Buddhists' ethics are equal in merit to an American
atheist.
• Culture is responsible for the way we see and experience the world,
including our morality. Thus, we never really see things as they
really are, we always place our interpretation on reality. No
absolute standard for how we should act can be given because
we are not in a position to know (because knowledge of
universal truths is impossible) which system is "better." There is
no "better" - only different.
• As we will see, many ethical systems refer to some sort of absolute
"yardstick" to ground the correctness of their view. As we have
seen, relativism rejects any yardstick altogether. In relativism, we
are not burdened with trying to defend any sort of ethical system.
Instead we look at a common practice within a society.
• However, we should not conclude that just because there are no
moral absolutes, that therefore we should never make moral
judgements. For order and stability in our lives, we need rules,
and we life is best when we work together. This is why, for
example, it is okay in one culture to cut off the hand of ...
Unit 1 discusses believing in God. It covers religious upbringing, arguing that many people come to believe in God through being brought up in Christian families and communities where parents introduce children to belief and encourage faith development. However, as children grow up, they may question the beliefs they were taught or adopt different views after exposure to other ideas. The unit also examines arguments for and against belief in God from the perspectives of theists, atheists, and agnostics.
Does Morality Need Religion – Yes!Professor Derrick Willis.docxelinoraudley582231
Does Morality Need Religion – Yes!
Professor Derrick Willis
The question of whether”morality needs religion” is an important one in both philosophy and religion. The central concern is where exactly does our sense of morality, of right and wrong, come from. Does our moral consciousness come from religion or God, or is it a socially constructed phenomenon - does it come from our parents, social environment, or community. If it is socially constructed, then where do we draw the line in terms of differences between cultures or cultural attitudes. For example, during Nazi Germany 12 million people were murdered, 6 million of whom were Jews. Their skin was used for lampshades, and they were tortured and used as slaves. If morality is socially constructed (that is based on culture) then does that mean that the cultural viewpoint of the Nazis was correct. And since we come from a different culture, then where and on what basis do we say that their cultural paradigm was incorrect or wrong? Who are we to tell them that their moral views (murder and torture) are wrong? This is the substance of the debate.
Author’s Viewpoint
Author C. Stephen Layman argues that morality does need religion because God becomes the absolute standard that draws the line. So Layman argues that:
Any claim concerning the Good must be based on religion as an independent idealprinciple.
Morality is a claim concerning the Good.
Therefore, morality must be based on religion as an independent ideal principle.
Layman argues that morality is not an emergent phenomenon, i.e., emerged into existence at a particular time and place, or in a particular social environment, but was established by God. Even though various cultures oppose murder, stealing, and lying, the foundation and groundwork for that was laid by God. We have a tendency to assign human value to principles that have ordered our universe from the beginning. Even though human beings twist religion to their own devices, there are in essence some universally agreed upon principles that they all share, opposition to murder and torture are two.
If our sense of right and wrong comes from culture then what about secret violations when no one’s looking. For the religious person secret violations aren’t permitted because God is watching, and as we know, you can’t hide from God. But if right and wrong are culturally determined then why not cheat or murder if you can get away with it. If no one knows; no harm, no foul.
And further still if it is culturally determined, then doesn’t this just simply insulate one culture in relation to the next. My culture is right, so I really have no moral obligation to a culture other than my own. This, according to Layman, creates a kind of cultural tribalism. My culture is my culture and you can’t judge it. If I need to kill my citizens to make life “better” in my country, then so be it. Your culture is your culture, and my culture is my culture, so butt out!
But if God is in.
This document discusses morality from different perspectives - religious, psychological, and definitions. It defines morality as principles concerning right and wrong behavior or a society's values and conduct. Religions like Islam promote morality through teachings in the Quran about good deeds and avoiding harm. Psychologically, Kohlberg's theory of moral development outlines stages of reasoning from following rules to principles of justice. Freud's model of the id, ego, and super-ego relates to morality, with the super-ego making one more moral by submitting to divine will.
The document discusses different theories about the nature and development of conscience from various philosophers and religious perspectives. It addresses key points from thinkers like Newman, Butler, Aquinas, Freud, Piaget, Fromm and others. While some see conscience as the voice of God inherent in human nature, others argue it develops gradually through experience and reasoning or is influenced by one's environment and upbringing. Critics question inconsistencies in views that conscience is perfect or always leads to correct decisions.
The Moral Compass Essay
Contemporary Moral Issue Essay
What is Morality? Essay
Morals, Values, and Ethics Essays
A Basis for Morality Essay
Moral Definition Essay
Moral Definition Essay
Why Be Moral ?
Essay On Moral Panic
Morality Essay examples
Dan Barker argues that atheists can find purpose and meaning in life without religion by recognizing that life is inherently valuable and meaningful in itself, not because it is directed by a deity. He asserts that purpose comes from within the individual through their own goals and accomplishments rather than being imposed from an external god. Barker also claims that morality exists independently of religion through humanistic values of minimizing harm rather than following religious rules.
slides 2 problem of pholosophy. to discover areas of philosophy to scientific...muhammadsulaman34
This document discusses several key topics in philosophy including ontology, ethics, and free will vs determinism.
1) Ontology is the study of the nature of reality and existence. It examines questions about the relationship between mind and body, the nature of time and causality, and whether reality exists independently of the mind.
2) Ethics examines theories of right and wrong action, including metaethics, normative ethics, and applied ethics. It explores the nature of morality and how people should act.
3) The debate over free will vs determinism centers around whether human actions are freely chosen or determined by prior causes. Compatibilists believe we can have both free will and determinism, while hard determin
The document discusses several topics related to ethics and morality, including:
1) Ethics refers to standards of conduct based on moral duties and virtues derived from principles of right and wrong.
2) Moral relativism holds that values are determined by one's society and there are no universal values, only customs that vary by culture.
3) Several individuals are presented as potentially morally inconsistent based on certain actions and beliefs.
4) Key questions are asked about determining right and wrong, universal human values, and whether moral progress has been made.
The document discusses several topics related to ethics and morality, including:
1) Ethics refers to standards of conduct based on moral duties and virtues derived from principles of right and wrong.
2) Moral relativism holds that values are determined by one's culture and there are no universal values.
3) Theories of ethics attempt to provide fundamental moral principles, such as religious ethics, duty ethics, utilitarianism, and Kant's approach.
4) Ethical dilemmas present difficult situations involving complex choices between competing ethical considerations.
The document discusses several topics related to ethics and morality, including:
1) Ethics refers to standards of conduct based on moral duties and virtues derived from principles of right and wrong.
2) Moral relativism holds that values are determined by one's society and there are no universal values, only customs that vary by culture.
3) Several theories of ethics are presented as attempts to provide fundamental moral principles, including religious ethics, duty ethics, utilitarianism, and Kant's approach.
4) The document raises questions about whether people are inherently good or bad, the relationship between self-interest and morality, and whether scientific and moral progress go hand in hand.
The document discusses several topics related to ethics and morality, including:
1) Ethics refers to standards of conduct based on moral duties and virtues derived from principles of right and wrong.
2) Moral relativism holds that values are determined by one's society and there are no universal values, only customs that vary by culture.
3) Several individuals are presented as potentially morally inconsistent based on certain actions or beliefs.
4) Key questions are asked about determining right and wrong, universal human values, and whether moral progress has been made.
This document discusses the concepts of ethical pluralism, cultural relativism, and moral uncertainty in modern globalized society. It notes that there are now many competing voices, philosophies, ideas, and religions, and cultural relativism suggests moral values are determined by individual cultures rather than universal standards. However, some actions like slavery or Nazi atrocities are considered universally wrong. The key question emerges of how to believe in pluralism while also maintaining that some things are objectively right or wrong.
This document provides an overview of ethics as a branch of philosophy concerned with concepts of right and wrong conduct. It discusses the major areas of ethics including meta-ethics (the nature of moral judgments), normative ethics (moral standards), and applied ethics (examining particular issues). Key concepts covered include moral relativism, deontology, virtue ethics, and consequentialism as normative ethical theories. The document also examines criteria for evaluating ethical theories and the components of an ideal moral judgment.
This document discusses several ethical theories including relativism, cultural relativism, and divine command theory. Relativism holds that morality is based on social norms and there are no absolute moral truths. Cultural relativism says that morality depends on the norms of a particular culture. Divine command theory states that an action is right if it is commanded by God. The document provides examples and analysis of each theory, discussing their strengths and weaknesses in describing ethical decisions. It also addresses interpretations of religious texts and how different groups can understand commands differently.
This document discusses different theories and perspectives on ethics and morality. It begins by examining how ethics relates to value judgements and decision making. It then explores moral relativism and the idea that moral values vary between cultures. Different views on morality are presented, including that it requires conscience and responsibility. The document also discusses deontological ethics based on duty, utilitarianism focusing on the greatest happiness, and the perspectives that morality stems from religion, fear of punishment, or self interest.
This document discusses several perspectives on the nature of morality:
1. Moral skepticism argues that morality is subjective and there is no objective moral truth. Moral statements are merely expressions of preference.
2. Moral relativism claims that morality is determined by one's society or culture and there are no universal moral values. However, this view faces issues with tolerating intolerant practices.
3. Some philosophers like Kant have argued that morality can be known through reason and deriving universal moral rules and duties. However, critics argue this view faces counterexamples where following one's duty seems to lead to immoral outcomes.
4. Utilitarianism holds that the morally right action is one
Understanding Grace - Blood Covenant and Prodigal.pdfEhab Roufail
How is Grace Defined?
What did the Lord Jesus do for us?
Old Testament Blood Covenant
What is Grace?
Prodigal Son
Is Divine Grace for all?
What do we have to do for it?
This document discusses the roles of men and women in the church. It outlines the seven clerical orders and notes that the priesthood is comprised of deacons, priests, and bishops, which are only open to men. It provides details on the roles of deacons and priests. While women cannot be priests, the document highlights examples of saintly women in the Bible and notes the important prophetic roles women have played in revealing aspects of the church. Overall, it examines the theological reasoning for distinguishing roles while emphasizing that roles do not determine relative value between men and women.
1. Evidence for a beginning of the Universe
2. Evidence for fine tuning in the Universe
3. Solar System’s fitness for life
4. Earth’s fitness for life
5. The miracle of life
The document discusses the reliability of the Bible by examining prophecy, integrity, and textual criticism. It outlines how prophecies in the Bible have been fulfilled, distinguishing it from other religious texts. Specific prophecies about Jesus' first coming are analyzed, showing how he fulfilled over 100 prophecies about characteristics like his birthplace, lineage, and manner of death. The accurate fulfillment of prophecies affirms the Bible's divine origin and reliability.
What is prophecy?
Test of a true prophet
The importance of prophecy
Messianic prophecies
The significance of messianic prophecies
Messianic prophecy issues
Probability of fulfillment of prophecies
Other Old Testament (OT) prophecies
Prophecy – the future told in advance by God through a prophet
John 5:39, “You search the Scriptures; for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me.”
The reliability of the Bible is confirmed by the accuracy of its prophecies
Cannot be said of any other “sacred writings”
Other writings make great claims but contain no prophecy unique to them that establishes “truth"
“For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God.” (Romans 8:14)
Exactly how are we be led by the Holy Spirit?
Exactly how does the Holy Spirit communicate to all of us in this life?
If the Bible calls the Holy Spirit our Guide and Teacher in this life, then this means He will attempt to communicate to all of us from time to time.
Otherwise we will never be able to pick up from Him exactly what He is trying to teach us or tell us to do.
The very first thing we need to know if we want to learn how to be led by the Holy Spirit is that
We can develop a direct personal relationship with Him
Just like you already have with God and Jesus.
Here are two key verses from the apostle Paul telling us that we are allowed to have direct communication and direct fellowship with the Holy Spirit Himself:
“The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit be with you all.” (2 Corinthians 13:14)
“Therefore if there is any consolation in Christ, if any comfort of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit …” (Phillippians 2:1)
Types of Messiah
What is prophecy?
Test of a true prophet
The importance of prophecy
Messianic prophecies
The significance of messianic prophecies
Messianic prophecy issues
Probability of fulfillment of prophecies
Other Old Testament (OT) prophecies
End Time prophecies
The significance of the Apocalypse
The circumstances surrounding its writing
Who wrote it? To Whom? Where? Why?
Its structure and Content
Aids to interpretation
How can we benefit from it?
Biblical Dating
“Being the right person to serve my future spouse’s needs and be a God-glorifying husband or wife”
"Acceptable" is such a loose term, so it's hard to say what is "acceptable" for any given person. After all, everyone is a different individual and their situations and maturity will vary greatly. Something that is acceptable for one person may not be acceptable for another.
Also keep in mind 1 Corinthians 10:23 (NIV), which says, "'I have the right to do anything,' you say—but not everything is beneficial. 'I have the right to do anything'—but not everything is constructive." We have many freedoms through Christ, but that doesn't mean that everything will be healthy or good for you.
The document discusses the problem of suffering and evil in the world. It presents three main categories of suffering: 1) Suffering caused by man, 2) Natural disasters, and 3) Disease. It also notes that atheists use the pervasiveness of suffering to discredit the idea of a loving God. However, theists believe God may have reasons for allowing suffering that humans do not understand. The document argues that atheists must prove: 1) The impossibility of God using evil for a greater good, 2) That God could have no reasons for allowing suffering, and 3) An instance of definitively pointless suffering. But overall, humans may lack the information to make definitive judgments about God's reasons for permitting evil
Helmet of Salvation
Who do you think you are?
Problems of low self esteem
Satans psychological weapon
God’s view of me
Biblical
Our new position in Christ
Implications
Christian, Coptic, Christmas,
You Are Important To God
Your Life Matters To God
Your Faith Matters To God
The Relevance of Christmas
The Reality of Christmas
The Reason for Christmas
The Result of Christmas
The Seven Fasts of the Church – and the focus of the main Three
The Sunday readings before and During Advent
Other 40 Day Fasts
Praise during the month of Kiahk
This document discusses using an agile delivery model for strategic programs. It proposes that agile methodologies can be suitable for large organizations and problems by scaling up the approach. For example, a single scrum team may consist of 7-9 people planning in 2-week sprints with user stories, while a program may consist of 7-9 teams planning in quarterly iterations with customer features. The document outlines levels of planning from portfolio teams down to delivery teams. It also discusses estimating and planning milestone deliverables, iterating rather than incrementing work, and using an agile approach like "Ready...Fire...Aim" for large strategic programs and portfolios.
The document discusses views on sex, premarital relationships, and masturbation from a religious perspective. It presents arguments that:
1) Sex was created by God for the loving union of husband and wife within marriage to bond the couple and allow procreation. Premarital sex risks damaging future relationships and marriage.
2) Masturbation that involves lustful thoughts is sinful according to scripture. It can also lead to sexual addiction and experimentation with unclean acts.
3) Not masturbating is not unhealthy as the body naturally reabsorbs unused sperm cells, and any residual secretions are released through nocturnal emissions. Remaining pure allows one to live a holy life as called by God
St. Paul's life transformed dramatically from persecutor of Christians to their greatest advocate. After his encounter with Jesus on the road to Damascus, where he was blinded by a bright light and heard Jesus' voice, Paul underwent a conversion and became a sincere disciple. He spent years preaching in Arabia, Damascus, Syria, and Cilicia before Barnabas took Paul under his wing and introduced him to other Christians. Together, they were then sent by the church in Antioch to preach in Cyprus, Pamphylia and Phrygia.
Jesus - the One I love
Let’s get to discuss a bit The Character of the One we love to follow
His Creativity
His Depth
His Righteousness
His Psychological insight
His Compassion
A Free eBook ~ Valuable LIFE Lessons to Learn ( 5 Sets of Presentations)...OH TEIK BIN
A free eBook comprising 5 sets of PowerPoint presentations of meaningful stories /Inspirational pieces that teach important Dhamma/Life lessons. For reflection and practice to develop the mind to grow in love, compassion and wisdom. The texts are in English and Chinese.
My other free eBooks can be obtained from the following Links:
https://www.slideshare.net/ohteikbin/presentations
https://www.slideshare.net/ohteikbin/documents
The Hope of Salvation - Jude 1:24-25 - MessageCole Hartman
Jude gives us hope at the end of a dark letter. In a dark world like today, we need the light of Christ to shine brighter and brighter. Jude shows us where to fix our focus so we can be filled with God's goodness and glory. Join us to explore this incredible passage.
The forces involved in this witchcraft spell will re-establish the loving bond between you and help to build a strong, loving relationship from which to start anew. Despite any previous hardships or problems, the spell work will re-establish the strong bonds of friendship and love upon which the marriage and relationship originated. Have faith, these stop divorce and stop separation spells are extremely powerful and will reconnect you and your partner in a strong and harmonious relationship.
My ritual will not only stop separation and divorce, but rebuild a strong bond between you and your partner that is based on truth, honesty, and unconditional love. For an even stronger effect, you may want to consider using the Eternal Love Bond spell to ensure your relationship and love will last through all tests of time. If you have not yet determined if your partner is considering separation or divorce, but are aware of rifts in the relationship, try the Love Spells to remove problems in a relationship or marriage. Keep in mind that all my love spells are 100% customized and that you'll only need 1 spell to address all problems/wishes.
Save your marriage from divorce & make your relationship stronger using anti divorce spells to make him or her fall back in love with you. End your marriage if you are no longer in love with your husband or wife. Permanently end your marriage using divorce spells that work fast. Protect your marriage from divorce using love spells to boost commitment, love & bind your hearts together for a stronger marriage that will last. Get your ex lover who has remarried using divorce spells to break up a couple & make your ex lost lover come back to you permanently.
Visit https://www.profbalaj.com/love-spells-loves-spells-that-work/
Call/WhatsApp +27836633417 for more info.
A375 Example Taste the taste of the Lord, the taste of the Lord The taste of...franktsao4
It seems that current missionary work requires spending a lot of money, preparing a lot of materials, and traveling to far away places, so that it feels like missionary work. But what was the result they brought back? It's just a lot of photos of activities, fun eating, drinking and some playing games. And then we have to do the same thing next year, never ending. The church once mentioned that a certain missionary would go to the field where she used to work before the end of his life. It seemed that if she had not gone, no one would be willing to go. The reason why these missionary work is so difficult is that no one obeys God’s words, and the Bible is not the main content during missionary work, because in the eyes of those who do not obey God’s words, the Bible is just words and cannot be connected with life, so Reading out God's words is boring because it doesn't have any life experience, so it cannot be connected with human life. I will give a few examples in the hope that this situation can be changed. A375
The Book of Samuel is a book in the Hebrew Bible, found as two books in the Old Testament. The book is part of the Deuteronomistic history, a series of books that constitute a theological history of the Israelites and that aim to explain God's law for Israel under the guidance of the prophets.
Protector & Destroyer: Agni Dev (The Hindu God of Fire)Exotic India
So let us turn the pages of ancient Indian literature and get to know more about Agni, the mighty purifier of all things, worshipped in Indian culture as a God since the Vedic time.
The Book of Ruth is included in the third division, or the Writings, of the Hebrew Bible. In most Christian canons it is treated as one of the historical books and placed between Judges and 1 Samuel.
The Enchantment and Shadows_ Unveiling the Mysteries of Magic and Black Magic...Phoenix O
This manual will guide you through basic skills and tasks to help you get started with various aspects of Magic. Each section is designed to be easy to follow, with step-by-step instructions.
Trusting God's Providence | Verse: Romans 8: 28-31JL de Belen
Trusting God's Providence.
Providence - God’s active preservation and care over His creation. God is both the Creator and the Sustainer of all things Heb. 1:2-3; Col. 1:17
-God keep His promises.
-God’s general providence is toward all creation
- All things were made through Him
God’s special providence is toward His children.
We may suffer now, but joy can and will come
God can see what we cannot see
Sanatan Vastu | Experience Great Living | Vastu ExpertSanatan Vastu
Santan Vastu Provides Vedic astrology courses & Vastu remedies, If you are searching Vastu for home, Vastu for kitchen, Vastu for house, Vastu for Office & Factory. Best Vastu in Bahadurgarh. Best Vastu in Delhi NCR
Heartfulness Magazine - June 2024 (Volume 9, Issue 6)heartfulness
Dear readers,
This month we continue with more inspiring talks from the Global Spirituality Mahotsav that was held from March 14 to 17, 2024, at Kanha Shanti Vanam.
We hear from Daaji on lifestyle and yoga in honor of International Day of Yoga, June 21, 2024. We also hear from Professor Bhavani Rao, Dean at Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham University, on spirituality in action, the Venerable BhikkuSanghasena on how to be an ambassador for compassion, Dr. Tony Nader on the Maharishi Effect, Swami Mukundananda on the crossroads of modernization, Tejinder Kaur Basra on the purpose of work, the Venerable GesheDorjiDamdul on the psychology of peace, the Rt. Hon. Patricia Scotland, KC, Secretary-General of the Commonwealth, on how we are all related, and world-renowned violinist KumareshRajagopalan on the uplifting mysteries of music.
Dr. Prasad Veluthanar shares an Ayurvedic perspective on treating autism, Dr. IchakAdizes helps us navigate disagreements at work, Sravan Banda celebrates World Environment Day by sharing some tips on land restoration, and Sara Bubber tells our children another inspiring story and challenges them with some fun facts and riddles.
Happy reading,
The editors
2. Moral Law Posits a Lawgiver
The eminent apologist Ravi Zacharias says:
• When you say there is evil, aren’t you admitting
there is good?
• When you accept the existence of goodness, you
must affirm a moral law on the basis of which
to differentiate between good and evil.
• But when you admit to a moral law, you must
posit a moral lawgiver.[3]
3. Definitions
• Objective
– Something is objective if it
does not depend on the
opinions or beliefs one
person or even many people
hold about it. – Think of an
Object, say a mountain
• Subjective
– Based on or influenced by
personal feelings or
preference – for example
which do you prefer
chocolate or strawberry
4. Morality is Objective
• That morality is objective, binding, and
inevitable is most evident to us when we are
either the victims of injustice or when our
sympathies for the helpless are awakened.
• Everything within us cries out against such
experiences.
5. Morality is
Objective
• To say that moral values and duties
are objectively real is to say that
they exist independently of people’s
opinions or beliefs about them.
• If something is right, it would be
right even if everybody believed it
was wrong.
• And if something is wrong, it is
wrong even if everyone believes it
is right.
6. C-Section
Story
A number of years ago, I read a story about
a woman who had given birth through C-
section in a certain country. In the process
of the delivery, something went horribly
wrong. The doctors, one would hope
inadvertently, inflicted deep wounds on the
baby’s face. The baby could not breathe and
breastfeed at the same time. The doctors
assured the mother that the baby would be
fine in a couple of days and encouraged her
to take the baby home.
7. C-
Section
Story
Well, the baby got worse. When the mother
took the baby back to the hospital, she
discovered that, to her horror, the hospital
staff had purged all the records of her ever
having been to the hospital. They told her that
if she ever set foot in that hospital again, they
would call the police on her because of what
she had done to her own baby. It is impossible
for me to imagine any morally healthy person
reading such a story without reacting strongly
against the injustice.
8. C-Section
Story
• An unabashed craving for justice is
deeply woven into the very fiber of
our being, and it is strongly
awakened in such moments.
• Such a reaction betrays the fact that
we are very much aware of the
existence of a moral law that applies
to all of us.
• We can’t complain about evil without
at the same time invoking the
primacy of good, and to do so is to
acknowledge that morality is
objective.
10. Common
Objections
Q. 1 Are you saying that believers in
God are more moral than those who
don’t believe?
• William Lane Craig: “The
argument is not that belief in God
is necessary to recognize moral
facts and order our lives
accordingly. The Bible says that
non-believers have the moral law
written on their heart.” (Romans
2:14-15)
11. Common Objections
Q.2 Hasn’t evolution taught us all that
we need to know about morality?
• Answer 1: If morality came about
through evolution through survival,
then morality is not objective. “If . .
. men were reared under precisely
the same conditions as hive-bees,
there can hardly be a doubt that our
unmarried females would, like the
worker-bees, think it a sacred duty
to kill their brothers, and mothers
would strive to kill their fertile
daughters; and no one would think
of interfering.” – Charles Darwin
12. Common
Objections
Q.2 Hasn’t evolution taught us all that we need
to know about morality?
• In a universe of electrons and selfish genes,
blind physical forces and genetic replication,
some people are going to get hurt, other
people are going to get lucky, and you won't
find any rhyme or reason in it, nor any
justice. The universe that we observe has
precisely the properties we should expect if
there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose,
no evil, no good, nothing but pitiless
indifference.” - Richard Dawkins, River
Out of Eden: A Darwinian View of Life
13. Dangers of Subjective Morality
Some years ago serial killer Ted Bundy, who
confessed to over thirty murders, was
interviewed about his gruesome activities.
Consider the frightening words to his victim as
he describes them:
• Then I learned that all moral judgments are “value
judgments,” that all value judgments are subjective,
and that none can be proved to be either “right” or
“wrong”….I discovered that to become truly free,
truly unfettered, I had to become truly uninhibited.
And I quickly discovered that the greatest obstacle to
my freedom, the greatest block and limitation to it,
consists in the insupportable “value judgment” that I
was bound to respect the rights of others. I asked
myself, who were these “others”? Other human
beings, with human rights?
14. Dangers
of
Subjective
Morality
Why is it more wrong to kill a human
animal than any other animal, a pig or a
sheep or a steer? Is your life more to you than
a hog’s life to a hog? Why should I be willing
to sacrifice my pleasure more for the one than
for the other? Surely, you would not, in this
age of scientific enlightenment, declare that
God or nature has marked some pleasures as
“moral” or “good” and others as “immoral”
or “bad”? In any case, let me assure you, my
dear young lady, that there is absolutely no
comparison between the pleasure I might take
in eating ham and the pleasure I anticipate in
raping and murdering you. That is the honest
conclusion to which my education has led
me—after the most conscientious examination
of my spontaneous and uninhibited self.5
15. Atheists Answer
• While in not accusing atheists in general of being
Ted Bundy-like, the question for the atheist is
simply: On what moral grounds can you provide a response
to Bundy?
• The atheistic options are limited. If morality has
nothing to do with God, as atheists suppose, what
does it have to do with? One response the atheist
could offer is moral relativism, either personal or
cultural. The personal moral relativist affirms that
morality is an individual matter; you decide for
yourself what is morally right and wrong.
16. Cultural Moral
Relativism
• But what about cultural moral
relativism—the view that moral
claims are the inventions of a
given culture?
• If right and wrong are cultural
inventions, then it would always
be wrong for someone within
that culture to speak out against
them.
17. Cultural Moral
Relativism
• If culture defines right and wrong,
then who are you to challenge it?
• For example, to speak out against
slavery in Great Britain in the
seventeenth century would have
been morally wrong, for it was
culturally acceptable. But surely it
was a morally good thing for
William Wilberforce and others to
strive against the prevailing
currents of their time and place to
abolish the slave trade.
18. Atheist Defence
• Here are three accounts that recent atheists have
defended:
1. Objective morality simply “is,”
2. Morality is based on the selfish gene, and
3. Morality is an evolutionary illusion.8
• Let’s take a brief look at each of them.
19. 1. OBJECTIVE MORALITY
SIMPLY “IS”
• One approach some atheists have taken is to affirm
that there are objective moral values.
• After all, couldn’t a person both believe that there are
objective moral values and believe that God does not
exist?
• Is the God/morality connection a necessary one?
• While there are some atheists, such as Jean-Paul
Sartre, Michael Ruse, J. L. Mackie, and others, who do
hold that morality cannot be objective without the
existence of a God, there are others who disagree.
20. 1. OBJECTIVE
MORALITY SIMPLY “IS”
• One such person is atheist philosopher
Walter Sinnott-Armstrong. He puts the
point concisely: “In fact, many atheists are
happy to embrace objective moral values.
• Rape is morally wrong. So is
discrimination against gays and lesbians.
• Even if somebody or some
group thinks that these acts are not morally
wrong, they still are morally wrong.…
• [Agreeing that some acts are objectively
morally wrong] implies nothing about
God, unless objective values depend on
God. Why should we believe that they
do?”9
21. 1. OBJECTIVE MORALITY
SIMPLY “IS”
• But again the question arises: What grounds moral values?
Sinnott-Armstrong answers this way:
• “What makes rape immoral is that rape harms the victim in
terrible ways… It simply is [immoral].”10
• I can wholeheartedly believe that the lights in the room will
turn on after I flip the light switch without any
understanding of electricity. I can still function well in
society, going from place to place, flipping light switches and
never even entertaining the idea that electricity is involved in
the process of causing the lights to turn.
22. 1. OBJECTIVE MORALITY
SIMPLY “IS”
• If, however, someone asked me to provide a justification for
the lights going on when the switch is flipped, and my reply
was simply, “They just do,” this is no answer at all.
• The fact is, the flow of an electric charge (among other
factors) grounds our explanation for the lights going on
when the switch is turned on.
• The same applies to morality and God. One may well be able
to deny God’s existence and still live a moral life, but there
would be no fundamental basis, no objective moral
grounding, for such a life.
• There would be no answer for Bundy.
23. 2. Morality Is
Based On The
Selfish Gene
• A second approach some atheists have
taken is to attempt to ground morality in
biological evolution. This is the approach
Richard Dawkins takes. In his book, The
Selfish Gene, he argues that “we are survival
machines— robot vehicles blindly
programmed to preserve the selfish
molecules known as genes.”11
• In his view, our moral aspirations and
beliefs are predetermined posits of our
genetic machinery, selfishly programmed to
advance the gene pool.
• He grants that selfishness does not at first
glance seem to be a good foundation for a
moral theory
24. 2. Morality Is Based On The
Selfish Gene
• He argues, sometimes selfish genes “ensure their own selfish
survival by influencing organisms to behave altruistically” or
morally.13 This happens especially with an organism’s kin—
brothers, sisters, and children.
• For “a gene that programs individual organisms to favour
their genetic kin is statistically likely to benefit copies of
itself.”14
• But it also happens through another means, he argues:
reciprocal altruism. This is the “you scratch my back and I’ll
scratch yours” idea, and it takes place not just with one’s close
relatives, but also between various members of the species
and even among members of different species.
25. 2. Morality Is Based On The
Selfish Gene
• Dawkins adds two further elements to his moral
account: reputation for generosity (that is, one acts
altruistically so others will form the belief that he is
generous), and
• Buying authentic advertising (that is, one acts morally in
order to prove that he has more than another—that he
is dominant and superior—and so can afford to be
altruistic and moral).
26. 2. Morality Is Based On The
Selfish Gene
• In essence, this is what Dawkins seems to be saying:
our genes are preprogrammed selfishly to replicate
themselves. Even so, individuals don’t always act
selfishly because our genes— working at the level of
the organism—sometimes act in altruistic and moral
ways, as this offers better gene propagation over the
long haul.
• Now, an obvious and glaring problem with this view
is that it has virtually nothing to do with what we
generally understand to be morality—with real right
and wrong, good and evil.
27. 2. Morality Is Based On The
Selfish Gene
• On Dawkins’s account, a person is kind to his
neighbour because he’s been preprogrammed by his
genes to do so and he’s been so
programmed because acting this way confers
evolutionary advantage.
• There is no objective right and wrong on this view.
• We simply call something “morally good” because our
genes have, through eons of evolutionary struggle
and survival, gotten us to believe that it is so.
28. 2. Morality Is Based On
The Selfish Gene
• But do Dawkins and
other atheists who
affirm this view really
believe that rape,
murder, and the like are
not truly and universally
evil, but are merely
socially taboo for
purposes of
evolutionary advantage?
• Are good and evil just
illusions conjured up by
our genes to get us to
behave in certain ways?
29. 3. MORALITY AS AN
EVOLUTIONARY ILLUSION
• A third approach to an atheistic account of morality has been
put forth by evolutionary ethicist and atheist philosopher of
science Michael Ruse and his colleague Edward Wilson. Here
is how they describe it:
• Morality, or more strictly our belief in morality, is merely an adaptation
put in place to further our reproductive ends. Hence the basis of ethics
does not lie in God’s will—or in the metaphorical roots of evolution or
any other part of the framework of the Universe. In an important sense,
ethics as we understand it is an illusion fobbed off on us by our genes to
get us to cooperate. It is without external grounding. Ethics is produced
by evolution but is not justified by it because, like Macbeth’s dagger, it
serves a powerful purpose without existing in substance.…Unlike
Macbeth’s dagger, ethics is a shared illusion of the human race.16
30. 3. MORALITY AS AN
EVOLUTIONARY ILLUSION
• Morality, on this view, is something most of us
believe in, follow, and practice, even though it doesn’t
exist in reality; it’s just an illusion foisted on us via
evolution so that we don’t kill ourselves off as a
species.
• Such a view has dire consequences. Indeed
the Edinburgh Review, one of the most respected
British magazines of the nineteenth century, observed
that if Darwin’s evolutionary account of morality
turns out to be right.
31. 3. MORALITY AS AN
EVOLUTIONARY ILLUSION
• “Most earnest-minded men will be compelled to give
up these motives by which they have attempted to live
noble and virtuous lives, as founded on a mistake; our
moral sense will turn out to be a mere developed
instinct….If these views be true, a revolution in
thought is imminent, which will shake society to its
very foundations by destroying the sanctity of
conscience and the religious sense.”17
34. The Euthyphro
Dilemma
• “Does God command the good because it is
good, or is the good, good because God
commands it?”
• Is there a standard of goodness that exists apart
from God?
• Does God decide what is good and bad?
35. The Euthyphro
Dilemma
Euthyphro’s problem
• If God appeals to a standard of goodness, it
means that God is subservient to something
other than himself. Morality is not grounded in
God.
• If God just decides that some behavior is right
and some is wrong, then morality becomes
arbitrary. God could decide that rape, stealing,
etc. is good, while mercy, justice, love are evil.
36. The Euthyphro
Dilemma
• “Does God command the good because it is good, or is the good,
good because God commands it?”
• Is there a standard of goodness that exists apart from God?
• Does God decide what is good and bad?
• Euthyphro’s problem
• • If God appeals to a standard of goodness, it means that God is
subservient to something other than himself. Morality is not
grounded in God.
• • If God just decides that some behavior is right and some is
wrong, then morality becomes arbitrary. God could decide that
rape, stealing, etc. is good, while mercy, justice, love are evil.
37. The Euthyphro
Dilemma
Answer:
• Reject both horns of the dilemma. It is a false
dilemma.
• Rather, point out that the essence of goodness
is God himself.
38. Kant’s moral argument
• There is an objective moral law that we must
obey
– The categorical imperative
– Determine by reason alone
– Doing our duty for duty’s sake
39. Kant’s moral argument
• We are required to attain the summum bonum
(the highest good)
– Reason tells us that obedience should bring about
the summum bonum
– But sometimes our obedience can lead to
misinterpretation
• This can lead to more suffering
– The summum bonum must involve both perfect
virtue and perfect happiness
40. Kant’s moral argument
• We can only be obliged to do something that we
can actually do
– Kant’s assumption
– We must be able to fulfil our obligation
41. Kant’s moral argument
• We cannot reach the summum bonum with the
assistance of God
– We are not the cause of the world
– We do not have the power to achieve SB
– Even if we could achieve perfect morality we cannot
guarantee connecting it with perfect happiness
42. Kant’s moral argument
• Since we are obliged to attain the summum
bonum, God must exist to ensure that we can
achieve that which we are obliged to do.
– If we cannot attain the SB on our own we need help
– It follows that such help must be the best and must
therefore be God
43. Agreement with Kant
• John Hick
– To recognise moral claims as taking precedence over all other
interests is, implicitly, to believe in a reality of some kind, other
than the natural world, that is superior to oneself and entitled to
one’s obedience… This is at least a move in the direction of
God.
John Hick Philosophy of religion, 1990
• H P Owen
– ‘It is impossible to think of a command without thinking of
a commander’
• Aquinas
– God wrote the laws into the design of the world
44. Freud’s criticisms
• If there is no moral obligation the argument
collapses
• If we do not need to attain that which is beyond
our grasp we do not need God
• Freud claimed that our apparent obligation
comes from the mind
45. Freud’s criticisms
• Our sense of moral obligation comes from:
• Our super ego that is our subconscious
• It is due to a conflict
– Between our desires and
– Society and parents
– Parents teach morals
Super ego
Subconscious desires Society demands
ego
Murder CareE.G.
Conscious mediator
46. Other objections to Kant
• People disagree as to what the moral laws are
• E.g. should you tell a lie to protect a person’s life?
• The categorical imperative says no
• W D Ross argues that the life is of more importance
• Cultural relativists
• Morality is based on cultural expectations
47. Other objections to Kant
• Erikson and Fromm
• Moral awareness is based on that what is of value to us
• Brian Davies
• Not illogical to aim for something beyond our grasp
• Does not have to be the Classical theistic God who helps
48. Putting it altogether
• Write bullet points that show how you would
go about answering the following exam
question:
a) Explain Kant’s version of the moral argument (33)
b) ‘The moral argument proves nothing more than the
desirability of there being a God.’ Discuss (17)
[3] Ravi Zacharias, Can Man Live Without God (Dallas: Word Publishing, 1994), 182.
8. William Lane Craig, Reasonable Faith: Christian Truth and Apologetics, (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 3rd edition, 2008), 176.
Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man (Amherst, N. Y.: Prometheus Books, 1998), 102.
Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man (Amherst, N. Y.: Prometheus Books, 1998), 102.
A statement by Ted Bundy, paraphrased and rewritten by Harry V. Jaffa, Homosexuality and the National Law (Claremont Institute of the Study of Statesmanship and Political Philosophy, 1990), 3–4.
A statement by Ted Bundy, paraphrased and rewritten by Harry V. Jaffa, Homosexuality and the National Law (Claremont Institute of the Study of Statesmanship and Political Philosophy, 1990), 3–4.
As quoted in Robert Wright, The Moral Animal (New York: Pantheon Books, 1994), 327–28. 18 C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity (New York: Macmillan, 1953), chaps. 1–5.