...Examine the View that Morality is Dependent on Religion. (21 Marks) There are three main views for Morality and religion: Morality is dependent on religion, morality is Independent of religion and morality is opposed to religion. There is a myriad of reasons for and against each of these statements. Many people do believe that morality does depend on religion for reasons such as that western law was originally based on Biblical principles, for example stealing and murder. For many however the question is how morality should be linked with religious faith, even though this causes problems between secularists and religious believers. The view I’m going to explore mainly in this essay is the view that ‘morality is dependent on religion’. People who believe that religion and morality are linked would argue that you cannot have morality without religion and that all rules come from God as he is the source of Religion. This is backed up by the fact that even social laws created to run western countries are taken from religious books such as, the Bible. Many people who believe the statement morality is dependent on religion would be Absolutists and believe that we should never question moral codes or there is ever a time when moral codes should be lenient. Absolutists would have no emotion to a situation and would therefore condemn situation ethics as they would believe the answer to a problem is always the same no matter the situation. This is because an absolutist would...
Words: 1039 - Pages: 5
...(i) Examine the claim that religion and morality are linked (21) If we agree with Ninian Smart, then an important dimension of all the world religions is the ethical dimension. But this is not necessarily the same as saying that religion and morality are inextricably linked. A slightly different way of framing the question is to ask whether you can have morality without religion, as Dostoyevsky suggested when his character Ivan asserts that ‘if God does not exist then everything is permitted’. Broadly speaking there are 3 different approaches to the question that can be taken: 1) Morality depends on religion 2) Morality is independent of religion 3) Morality is opposed to religion The first approach is to argue that behaving morally means behaving in accordance with God’s will, so that morality cannot be separated from religion. For religious people moral behaviour and commitment to the religion are closely related to beliefs about salvation in the afterlife. They also point out that without religion there would be no morality because all moral codes are derived from religion, many of our most firmly held moral convictions can be traced back to religious morality, such as the prohibition against murder, homosexuality and adultery. One strength of divine command ethics is that they provide a set in stone moral law with clear guidelines for how you should and should not behave; which some people may get from the bible, or other holy texts. The rules can be applied...
Words: 559 - Pages: 3
...whether or not you agree with Mr. Friedrich, he will undoubtedly make you think. Nietzsche isn’t critical of morality as a whole; in fact he’s welcoming to the concept of a higher morality, which would in turn entertain the lives of higher men, so to speak. He criticizes morality, but he does so fairly, he never favors a single ideology or religion, he is consistent across the board. His perspective on morality focuses on a duality, something he calls “master-slave morality”, where both master and slave morality are two differing sets of values. Slave morality focuses more on kindness and sympathy, whereas master morality focuses more on pride and strength. The core difference being that the “master” set of values was more for the strong willed than it’s “slave” counterpart, in fact he goes so far to say that slave morality is simple a re-valuation of what the master values, which yet again stresses that “intention” aspect of slave morality, whereas master morality focuses more on the consequences of our actions. There’s such a beauty in Nietzsche’s simplicity on the duality of the moralities (and my inadvertent poetry skills), and he reinforces his perceptions with connotations of the two value systems, where slave is viewed, well, as a slave, as a dependent, and where master is viewed as noble and self-empowered. And it’s this assertion where we really see the two moralities start to separate; Nietzsche draws a sharp divider in between slave and master with his perspective on how...
Words: 692 - Pages: 3
...AS Philosophy of Religion 2001 1. (a) What are the key features of the design argument for the existence of God? (10 marks) (b) Identify the strengths of this argument. To what extent are these strengths more convincing than its weaknesses? (10 marks) 2. (a) Describe the main strengths and weaknesses of the cosmological argument for the existence of God. (14 marks) (b) To what extent do the weaknesses of this argument limit its effectiveness? (6 marks) 3. (a) Examine the characteristics of BOTH a religious and a scientific interpretation of the origins of the universe. (14 marks) (b) Comment on the view that the differences between these interpretations rule out any major disagreement between them. (6 marks) 4. (a) What do religious believers mean by the ‘problem of suffering’? (5 marks) (b) Select any TWO theodicies and consider how far they offer solutions to this problem. (15 marks) 5. (a) Examine TWO philosophical reasons for belief in miracles. (6 marks) (b) Outline at least TWO problems with belief in miracles. (8 marks) (c) Consider the claim that there are no acceptable solutions to these problems. (6 marks) 2002 1. (a) Outline the design argument for the existence of God. (7 marks) (b) ‘The design argument fails because of its weaknesses.’ Examine and comment on this claim. (13...
Words: 3353 - Pages: 14
... Teaching and Learning in COMM101 What is a Corporation? The Business of Business Sources of Morality The Importance of Moral Principles Past Cohort Performances HD Autumn 2013 (607) Spring 2012 (440) Autumn 2012 (674) Spring 2011 (528) 15% 6% 13% 13% D 31% 25% 28% 22% C 32% 34% 29% 25% P 12% 19% 18% 25% F 8% 10% 7% 9% TF 2% 5% 3% 6% Avg. 69.75 65.36 69.02 65.88 Autumn 2011 (701) 10% 24% 26% 25% 7% 6% 65.38 1 22/03/2014 Critical elements in a teaching episode people learning processes context learning outcomes Adapted from Biggs and Tang, 2007 T & L Challenges in COMM101 Interdisciplinary subject Based on ethics Subjective Multiple perspectives A feeder subject for other faculty subjects Questions for teachers... 1. How do we know whether learning is occurring in the subject? 2. What is my (implicit) theory of learning? 2 22/03/2014 Students’ developmental journey Developmental Level Reliance on external [Foundations] Student traits Knowledge viewed as certain references Reliance on authorities (e.g. professors, parents) as source of knowledge Externally defined value system and identity Act in relationships to acquire approval At the crossroads Evolving awareness of multiple perspectives [Intermediate Learning] and uncertainty Evolving awareness of own values and identity and of limitations of dependent relationships Self-authorship [Capstone] Awareness of knowledge as contextual Development of internal...
Words: 995 - Pages: 4
...Based on different sociology dissertations, morality has been an issue that many societies globally have been trying to deal with. This term is used to describe the code of acceptable behaviors in a given society or culture. On the other hand, moral minima is a word that goes along with morality. This sets a standard by which the people in the society have to follow so that they may be living within the limits of proper moral conduct. The advent of civilization has given room to various forms that come from moral minima. As such, morality has become an issue that is interpreted in different ways depending how one looks or evaluates it (Goodman, 2010, p.87). Therefore, this has given rise to at least three areas where morality is supposedly received or obtained. Firstly, morality can be considered relative to the laws of a given nation so that what the law says is right. Second, morality can be said to have also come from religion where the various religions have their own holy books by which members are told to behave in a certain way. Finally, it is the personal source of morality. This is what has sparked a lot of controversy in many subject to millions of interpretation and understandings. Consequently, this is what I believe started influential philosophers like Lenn Goodman into argument that there are some things, which are certainly wrong. In this regard, this study seeks to explore the credits or challenges Goodman presents in his assertions (Goodman, 2010, p.88). In...
Words: 805 - Pages: 4
...I believe that God and religion is learnt and that it is similar to culture. Additionally, the teleological argument is dependent of our experience of the world and because of this we cannot be sure of anything. Similar to what Hume said, we all experience things differently, what appears one way to me can appear the opposite way to someone else. Consequently, I agree that analogies do not support arguments. For example, the analogy that a clock has a maker to support that the world has a maker does not work in my opinion because the argument would be infinite because would not God have to have a maker. Additionally, If God has no maker, could I not use that argument to state that the world may not have a make and that it has forever existed. This is why I also agree that the law of causality cannot support the teleological...
Words: 599 - Pages: 3
...(1) What is Morality, And where it comes from: What is Morality? Morality is defined as a system or code that we humans use to differentiate between right and wrong. This system could be derived from a number of factors: Religion, Culture, and upbringing. It is difficult enough to determine what an individual’s morals are, but going further to determine how we came to possess those morals is even more ambitious. Still, regardless of its difficulty, this subject consumes many philosophers and psychologists. Most moral psychologists further believe that complex social structures such as religion and politics as well as our need for social structures affect ones personal structure of morals. Some even theorize the possibility of evolution causing ones morals. Personally, I have great interest in philosophy and ethics, but the theory that evolution over time has affected morality today is one theory I have not read about. Where does morality come from? One major belief, of which I will personally emphasize on, is about Cultural relativism, in accordance with the source of morality, is the ideology that each culture has its own source of morality and therefore each culture has its own particular morality. An example of cultural relativism is that one culture believes that murder is bad while another culture believes that murder is not bad. This applies to the case in a big way, the people in Thailand believe that the sex tourism business is a reputable enterprise, but other countries...
Words: 1294 - Pages: 6
...will get the same reaction afterwards. But why are these acts good and moral? The real question is whether morally good acts are willed by God because they are morally good, or are they morally good because they are willed by God? This question was first raised by Socrates to Euthyphro in Plato’s dialogue in 380 B.C. In this essay, I will explain how this question relates to the Divine Command Theory of Morality and attempt to explain how it poses a dilemma within philosophy by contradicting how the logical thinking process works by creating a false dichotomy. To begin, The Divine Command Theory has been a main stay in philosophy since ancient times and has created numerous arguments throughout the ages, some of which are heavily debated till this day. The Divine Command Theory states that actions are considered morally good because they are commanded by God, or more simply phrased by Dale Tuggy in his writing, “to be right is to be commanded by God, and to be wrong is to be forbidden by God” (Tuggy, 53). Since God created the heavens and Earth, according to various religions past and present, God must have created the good will and moral acts. This seems legitimate in all aspects of thinking, especially for the believers in God, but what about the people around the world that do not believe in God or a God? Are they subject to the same way of thinking that the religious people are? After all, the Divine Command Theory is clear and concise about what constitutes a good, moral...
Words: 1265 - Pages: 6
...elements of culture and experience are related and dependent on other aspects or elements. All truth is relative. Morality is relative to culture. Moral relativism is not logical truth. It is not about celebrating diversity. It is rather looking at something from a point of view. There are two forms of relativism. Anthropological vs Philosophical. In anthropological relativism, erthocentric is bad and tolerant behavior is good. Erthocentric means when you do not look outside your religion and you think that your religion is the best. The idea of erthocentric is hence considered as a vice while tolerance is treated as virtue. Some people think that tolerance is subduing and hence it means that you are submitting. It is right if you think it is right but wrong if you think it is wrong. Philosophical relativism asserts that it depends upon the person who is interpreting the truth. The second form is Descriptive vs Normative relativism. Descriptive relativism assumes that different cultural groups have different modes of thought and reasoning. But evaluating the validity of the principles and beliefs is not expected. Normative relativism claims that modes of thought, standards of reasoning are right or wrong relative to a framework. The pros and cons of relativism are very contradictory. For example, if everything is relative then Hitler's actions are not unjust. Most people will then not accept relativism. Relativism undermines morality. Relativism denies that harming others is wrong...
Words: 450 - Pages: 2
...deliberations on morality are useless is called a _______ subjectist Cynical A______truth is dependent on the subject’s own experience. Subjective A person who believes that whatever an individual says is right for that particular individual is called a _____ Relativist Hume believed that the only kind of truth that can be known is a _____ Truth Subjective The notion of ethical _________which is often mistaken and confused with Ethical relativism, doubts that any acts are right or wrong. | | Skepticism Moral decisions, determinations, and judgments are acknowledged and established in a cultural context, and these positions are subject to change depending on one’s cultural Relativism ______is the notion that there is no concrete certainty the sphere of knowledge and truth. Relativism An objective______ is a truth that is independent of an observer. Truth _________ is the notion that truth depends on context—the time, place, and the identity of the observer. Relativism The certainty of Descartes’ rationalism leads to the idea of absolute truth In the never-ending debate between relativism and dogmatism, most people agree that the solution for inclusivity is moderation People who argue that ethics and morality are subjective, and moral choices should be made on individual assessment, or societal allowances granted to the individual are called ethical relativists ------------------------------------------------- Approaching morality _______ ethics...
Words: 1397 - Pages: 6
...question of morality. We are going to take a look at positions taken by great German philosophers Kant and Nietzsche on the question of morality and the way people should be treated, based on their arguments presented in theories developed by them. Kant’s philosophy is based on the assumption that there is a metaphysical dimension which implies that there are some absolute things that do exist outside of human beings and which are the ends in themselves (not intended to promote an achievement of any other end). Kant calls these abstract absolute things the categorical imperative. The categorical imperative in his view is something that is not dependent on anything else and, therefore, should be something that we should strive for. The concept of the categorical imperative is important because we can use it to determine whether our actions are being moral through the application of the universal law, which implies the categorical imperative. The universal law says that we should never act except in such a way that we can also will that our maxim should become a universal law. The whole system of Kant’s morality is based on the assumption that there is an autonomous will, which is the source of moral action and decision-making. Kant refers to it as a good will, which can be regarded as good without qualification, because it is good only through its willing, i.e., it is good in itself. According to this, here arises an interesting point that explains how Kant’s system of morality affects...
Words: 2047 - Pages: 9
...Sociologist & Philosopher NATIONALITY French Famous French Men RELIGION Agnosticism BORN ON 15 April 1858 AD BIRTHDAY 15th April Famous 15th April Birthdays DIED AT AGE 59 SUN SIGN Aries Aries Men BORN IN Épinal DIED ON 15 November 1917 AD PLACE OF DEATH Paris SPOUSE: Louise Dreyfus CHILDREN Marie Durkheim, Andre Durkheim EDUCATION Lycée Louis-le-Grand École Normale Supérieure Leipzig University FOUNDER/CO-FOUNDER Modern Sociology Emile Durkheim David Émile Durkheim is regarded as the principal architect of modern social science and father of sociology. Born into a family of a long line of rabbis, he broke away from the Jewish tradition and produced many secular works. His first major sociological work, ‘The Division of Labor in Society’, discussed how modern society is held together by a division of labor that makes individuals dependent upon one another. In ‘Rules of the Sociological Method’, he put forward the need for scientific approach in the study of sociology, a revolutionary thought in that period of time. He set up the first European department of sociology and became France's first professor of sociology and also established the journal L'Année Sociologique. His monograph ‘Suicide’, a study of suicide rates in Catholic and Protestant populations, elevated sociology to the status of science. In his ‘The Elementary Forms of Religious Life’, he presented a theory of religion, comparing the social and cultural lives of aboriginal and modern societies...
Words: 807 - Pages: 4
...Science»Sociology & Anthropology»Anthropology Durkheim and Geertz approaches to religion in society Updated on August 30, 2012 World Religions World Religions | Source Durkheim argued that religion is a social phenomenon, while for Geertz religion is a cultural system Both Durkheim and Geertz’s views of religion place emphasis on it‘s importance within a group, in relation to morality especially. However, they greatly differ in their approaches. Durkheim’s position is that the sacred is society which we are obliged to yield to and adopt within ourselves. Others though would argue that this withholds any power from the individual and also fails to consider religion as a source of power. Geertz considers religion to be a cultural system consisting of a collection of symbols which contain public and social meaning constructing the world as peoples perceive it. Yet Geertz fails to account for different interpretations and meanings of symbols despite the importance of symbols in his theory.Both theorists have ethnographic support despite their vast differences, however neither approach is completely clear of criticism. Durkheim regards religion as the means through which the clan expresses it’s being a society. According to Durkheim people experience society as a force outside themselves imposing rules of thought and behaviour which they explain in terms of God and religious forces. Religion acts as an expression of ‘a sense of dependence on a power outside ourselves’ (Radcliffe-Brown...
Words: 2108 - Pages: 9
...approaches to ethics; Utilitarianism, deontological, and virtue theory. These three approaches have similarities and differences. This paper will go over those similarities and differences. This paper will also include how each theory details ethics, morality and will illustrate a personal experience that shows that correlation between moral, values, and virtue as they relate to these three theories of ethics. Utilitarianism relies on the predictability of the consequences of an action for the good of the many. “Utilitarianism is a theory that suggests that an action is morally right when that action produces mare total utility for the group than any other alternative” (Boylan, 2009). Another word, utilitarianism does not, in any way, relate to morality or ethics because the action is taken for the most usefulness, no matter what the outcome. Without knowing the end result of an action we cannot ascertain if it is ethical or not. Deontological theory judges the morality of any action dependent on the action’s devotion to rules, obligations, or duty. Deontology is based on whether the action taken is right or wrong. This theory is practical in places where adherence to rules or duty are to be followed; such as the military or religion. The principle of deontology judges the activity and whether that activity sticks with the guidelines or rules. It uses these guidelines to determine if the action is “right.” It is not the repercussion of the activity but the right or wrong of the...
Words: 516 - Pages: 3
