Throughout Kai Nielsen 's book: Ethics Without God, he attempts to use logic and reason to show that there can be ethics without God. Nielsen is a Professor of Philosophy at the University of Calgary. Having written several books and holding a P.h.D, it seems that he is a credible source of knowledge. Yet despite his seemingly good arguments, they turn out to be statements that can 't take scrutiny. In chapter one: On Keeping The Wolf At Bay, the author asks if a world without God would lead society toward being animalistic. Without religion to teach people the right way to live, would the world just be dark and cruel? Nielsen says no, and in a sense this writer agrees with him- but for different reasons. Nielsen confirms that society would …show more content…
So even without the Bible (religion) mankind has a sense of right and wrong,. However, Nielsen is mistaken because these innate sense of morals should lead one to "religion." He mentions how the scandinavian countries are educated, secular and yet seem good. Again, while this may not be due to "religion," who 's to say this isn 't due to the fact of innate morality (Rom 2:14-15)? Certainly this author would say that religion and morality go hand in hand, it is Nielsen who wants to irrevocably divorce the two. The author isn 't bashful about his beliefs stating forthrightly, ". . . I and other atheists . . ." (Nielsen 18). Nielsen seems to bring up this next point several times throughout his book: Is something good just because God commands it? Or is something good because God 's nature is good? Can the Christian confirm both? Indeed, the Christian can. Because no evil can come forth from God, everything that comes forth from Him must be good. When God commanded …show more content…
This is true, if every man murdered who would be left in the world? If every man committed adultery, what kind of world would that be? The writer then focuses on four main laws: eternal laws (divine wisdom), natural law (apart from revelation), human law and divine law. Are laws in a society deemed good based on different cultures? Nielsen thankfully would say no. He would agree with the Christian that some things are universally good and some things are universally bad. He stated: "Every whole is greater than its parts. Things equal to one and the same thing are equal to one another" (Nielsen 33). Some things are universal. Yet for as confidently as Nielsen proclaims some of these truths, he finds a way out of dependance on God. Twisting linguistics to suit his own viewpoint he asks concerning God 's laws if they are really laws, or principles, or commitments. Do Christians just try and get authority out of moral convictions? Instead of vise versa (Nielsen
In the first chapter of God Behaving Badly, David Lamb argues that God is unfairly given a bad reputation. He claims these negative perceptions are fueled by pop culture and lead many to believe the lie that the God of the Old Testament is angry, sexist, racist, violent, legalistic, rigid, and distant. These negative perceptions, in turn, affect our faith. Ultimately, Lamb seeks to demonstrate that historical context disproves the presumptuous aforementioned. In addition, he defends his position by citing patterns of descriptions that characterize God throughout the Old Testament. “Our image of God will directly affect how we either pursue or avoid God. If we believe that the God of the Old Testament is really harsh, unfair and cruel, we won’t want anything to do with him” (Lamb 22). Clearly, they way Christians choose to see God will shape their relationship with Him.
Without Conscience: Book Report Psychopaths all have something in common, and that's luring unexpected people in their traps. Its part of human nature to wonder and question the unknown. Psychopaths are a clear example of the unknown with their personalities and behaviors that are far from the norm on a continuum. We wonder what makes them do some of the unimaginable and horrific things to people and/or animals.
In Wendell Berry’s “God, Science and Imagination,” Berry criticizes Steven Weinberg ’s essay “Without God.” Steven Weinberg’s essay talks about the non-existence of God. While Weinberg explains why God does not exist, Berry points out all of the flaws in Weinberg’s essay. Berry argues that Weinberg had no proof that God did not exist.
Emile Durkheim As An Idealist In "Elementary Forms Of The Religion Life" Durkheim's most important rationale in The Elementary Forms was to explain and clarify the generally primordial religious conviction identified by man. However, his focus as a consequence irk a number of outside connection for historians as his fundamental rationale went distinctly ahead of the modernization of an old culture for its own accord; quite the opposite, Durkheim's interest in The Division of Labor and Suicide, was eventually both contemporary as well as workable as he asserts that if prehistoric religion were taken as the topics of investigations, then it is for the reason that it apparently appears “to us better adapted than any other to lead to an understanding of the religious nature of man, that is to say, to show us an essential and permanent aspect of humanity”. Durkheim's doctrine studies that the society must abstain from reductionism and think about social phenomena- sui generis, disqualifying biologist or psychologist explanations; he focused concentration on the social-structural elements of mankind's social problems. Even though in his previous work Durkheim defined social facts by their constraint, massing his main part on the execution of the legal system, he was afterward moved to shift his views considerably. He then emphasized that those social facts and moral codes become potent guides and controls of behavior only to the extent that they become internalized in the cognizance of individuals, while persisting to subsist exclusively of individuals. This, compulsion is not a customary restraint of distant controls on individual will, but rather a moral commitment to conform to a rule. Durkheim attempted to study social facts not onl...
Religion, by far, is one of the most dominant forces the human race has ever seen. It has influenced and continues to influence billions of people all over the world. It has driven some of the most beneficial cooperative humanitarian efforts and some of the most heinous acts of violence anybody can perpetuate on another human being. In his book, When Religion Becomes Evil, Dr. Charles Kimball explores the causes and slippery slopes that lead to these kinds of atrocious behaviors. Many of his points were incredibly well thought out and valid, but one repetitive phrase that Dr. Kimball used caught my attention: “authentic religion.” This one phrase contains so many troublesome presuppositions that it is impossible not to question.
Morality is not something that should be easy to comprehend, and philosophers such as Mackie and McDowell are taking the wrong approach when trying to describe morality in natural terms. People need to understand that morality is something supernatural that we don’t have the capacity to comprehend. However, this does not mean that all moral judgments are false. There is a right choice in every scenario, however the variety of scenarios in this world is so grand that one cannot judge it by one code of
In today’s culture, the idea of there is perfect and divine designer that made the earth and everything that entails with it, really pushes people away. Not only has this idea been conflicted about in today’s culture. It has been especially trivial in past decades, an example of this is seen by H.J. McCloskey. McCloskey wrote an article about it called “On Being an Atheist”, which attempts to defeat the notion that there is a God. McCloskey first addresses the reader of the article and says these arguments he is about to address are only “proofs”, which should not be trusted by any theist. He then goes and unpacks the two arguments that he believes can actually be addressed, the cosmological and teleological argument. McCloskey also addresses the problem of evil, free will, and why atheism is more comforting than theism.
Richard Kyte starts out his book An Ethical Life by saying “To engage in ethics is to engage in a particular type of human activity, one that involves thinking and talking about how we should act—what we should do, say, think, or even feel in certain situations.” Kyte also states that ethics is not easy, simple or straightforward in any situation. Furthermore, ethics can vary based on your perception of what is true and what is just. So, what is ethics exactly? What is my understanding of ethics? Where did I get this tool box of values, morals, ethical understandings and virtues?
In Western society and culture, religion and morality have often intertwined and they have reflected their values onto each other. Today it is sometimes impossible to make a distinction between the two, since their influence has transcended generations. In modern Western culture, religion and society preach conformity. In order to be a “good” person, one must conform to the values imposed by the church1 and state.
Humanity is made in the image of God. Therefore, all people have unique and valuable gifts to contribute to society. Every individual is also a sinner in need of redemption through Christ’s death and resurrection. Developing a relationship with Christ is the foundational purpose of my Christian educational practice. Instruction must be differentiated because each student is a unique creation. Effective differentiation is impossible without the guidance of the Holy Spirit and the use of research-based instructional methods and formative evaluation. Powerful teaching constantly modifies instruction to best address the needs of the each student and provides a foundation of love that recognizes each child as a gift from God.
Morality has a strong connection with religion. The connection is so strong that most panels on ethics contain Ministers of God. This scenario therefore creates a natural question, “Does morality depend solely on religion?” The first point to understand in this scenario is the fact that God and religion are not the same. For instance, Christianity and Christ are not the same. The existence of God is independent of us just as the planets of Jupiter and Saturn are independent of human existence. The independence of God from us makes him prone to human weaknesses. For instance, Christians proclaim that their God is god but it is obvious to state that the religion - Christianity in itself has not been good as expected. For instance, when one sees
The Righteous Mind, by Jonathan Haidt, seeks to enrich liberalism, and political discourse generally, with a deeper awareness of human nature. Formerly unnoticed by fellow psychologists, Haidt argues that people are intuitive, and tend to follow their gut instincts, rather than find rational reasoning. He discovers through a series of experiments that people are not designed to listen to reason. Instead, when asked questions, most people reach conclusions quickly and come up with justifications afterwards. Haidt interviews people with absurd questions like, “Is it wrong to have sex with a dead chicken?” or “Is it wrong to have consensual intercourse with your sibling one night?” or “If your dog dies, is it wrong to eat it?” Most Americans agree
In John Perry's book Dialogue on Good, Evil and the Existence of God, he used three characters in the dialogue in order to clarify the positions of the three characters (Weirob, Miller, and Cohen), the arguments they provide in support their positions and the "end state" of their discussion. This allows us to examine our understanding of the good, evil and the existence of God.
Religious texts have been one of the main sources for laws and social customs since the conception of organized religion. Each religious text provides its followers with a code of conduct they are expected to apply to themselves, their actions, and their institutions. This code of conduct applies to the individual, as well as to the government and society to within which the people exist, and ultimately defines what a "just society" is in the context of that religion. Using stories and proverbs this code of conduct, and thus "just society", is not only set, but also shown in examples. In The Bible, the essence of a "just society" is laid out within passages that serve as "the laws", including Deuteronomy, and the Psalms, and in the stories, such as the stories of Job, David, Samuel, and the Family of Adam. The actions and nature of God in these stories are meant to be an example of the values and personality favored by God. In these passages, a structure for a just society is presented, and the values and examples, which are to be referred to and followed in the creation of this "just society", are discussed. However, even within these passages, there are discrepancies between the structure of the ideal "just society" and its values, and the following of these examples by the stories presented in The Bible. One of the most noticeable of these is the difference between the presentation of the ideal "just society" and values that are supposed to be implemented by the people, and the actual justice and values presented in the stories. This is particularly pertaining to the stories of the rulers appointed by God, and the vengeful nature of God himself presented in these stories.
Sometimes religion defines what is good or wrong. For a Christian religion supports people should love one another. Therefore, it influences people to understand the importance of staying together. In addition, other religions define the value and framework that helps in identifying what is bad or right. They teach the concepts of good thoughts and deeds in the society. The structures are defined in relevant resources like holy books such Quran and the Bible. In other groups, morality and religion are inseparable because moral behaviors are parts of their beliefs. Religious leaders act as an example to the members of the community. Also, some religious families where the forefathers were morally upright, individuals in the same background tend to support good morals (Doetzel