Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The relationship between morality and law
The relationship between morality and law
Religion and standards of morality
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The relationship between morality and law
In “The Brothers Karamazov” by Fyodor Dostoevsky made a famous claim that establishes the link between the existence of God and morality. Apart from the controversy related to the scope of the quotation, the discussion on the proper translation and interpretation of the words of Ivan Karamazov. For instance, in his article “Dostoevsky did not say it” D.Cortesi claims that Dostoevsky did not make such claim (Cortesi 1). However, the research by Russian-speaking authors shows that the original text of “The Brothers Karamazov” contains the statement under study (Volkov 1). Coming to the scope of the claim, one should concentrate on the reasons for making such claim, as well as the relation between the moral beliefs of secular humanists and the beliefs under study.
When one says that the non-existence of God leads to the fact that everything is permitted, one implies that there is a crucial link between the existence of God and morality. In other word, it may be summarized that the statement under study suggests viewing God as the source of morality. This suggestion brings one close to the divine command theory. As one of most well known meta-ethical theories, divine command theory lies in claiming that considering the action morally good is equal to viewing the action as the one, being commanded by God. It is suggested that what is moral is called forth by what God commands, and the only way to be moral is to follow the commands of God.
The statement by Dostoevsky is directly related to the scope of the divine command theory, as it is also based on viewing God as the main source of moral norms, and considering morality impossible without the existence of God. Let us consider the reasons that may have led to both the creation of th...
... middle of paper ...
...litics. Therefore, there are various historical examples of religious norms that contradicted the moral norms, elaborated on by secular humanists, as well as legal norms.
Above-mentioned arguments lead me to the conclusion that the identification of religious and moral norms, exemplified by Fyodor Dostoevsky, cannot be viewed as a proper approach to the detection of the roots of moral norms. However, religion-based moral norms and the ones, containing in the works of secular humanists and legislation have much in common and often exert simultaneous influence on the same social relations.
Works Cited
Blackburn, S. Ethics: a very short introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001. Print.
Cortesi, D.E. Dostoevsky didn’t say it. The Secular Web, 2000. Web.
Volkov, A.I. Dostoevsky did say it: a response to D.E.Cortesi. The Secular Web, 2011. Web.
Morals are usually the standards by one which lives in, whether them being good or bad. However, how about when religion influences ones morals? Religion isn’t or it doesn’t work for everyone, and that’s okay. But, there are many people out there that religion influences their morals; and the most common reason for that is that religion was influenced into them and into their morals as a child. Iri...
Morality derives from the Latin moralitas meaning, “manner, character, or proper behavior.” In light of this translation, the definition invites the question of what composes “proper behavior” and who defines morality through these behaviors, whether that be God, humanity, or an amalgamation of both. Socrates confronted the moral dilemma in his discourses millennia ago, Plato refined his concepts in his Republic, and leaders such as Mahatma Gandhi would commit their life work to defining and applying the term to political reform. Finally, after so many years, Martin Luther King’s “A Letter from Birmingham Jail” reaches a consensus on the definition of morality, one that weighs the concepts of justice and injustice to describe morality as the
Russian author Fyodor Dostoevsky was among those philosophical thinkers who grappled with the task of explaining why evil exists in a world created by a perfect god. Despite the powerful influence of Christianity in his early childhood and throughout his life, Dostoevsky encountered difficulties in answering this question, which he described, “Nature, the soul, God, love – all this is understood by the heart, not by the mind” (Gibson 1973, 9). Nevertheless, Dostoevsky not only felt obligated to discover a solution to the problem, but also “responsible to his fellow believers for its success or failure” (Gibson 1973, 169). This quest for a solution to the problem of theodicy ultimately led Dostoevsky to write The Brothers Karamazov, a novel that attempts to explain the need for evil in the world. In posing his solution to this problem, Dostoevsky explains the necessity of suffering for the realization of human redemption, as well as the role of Christ’s atoneme...
This philosophical study will define the relationship between morality and religion in the Socratic dialogue of the Euthyphro by Plato. The primary argument put forth by Socrates is to determine the causality of morality/piousness in and unto itself or by the approval of the gods. Socrates attempts to question the moral and religious authority of Euthyphro, which defines the important originations of the “moral good” through the command of the gods. However, Socrates defines the original presence of the morality/piousness before the gods can “approve” or disapprove” of its goodness. This is the theoretical position of denying the issue of "divine command” of the gods’ existence before morality/piousness, which Socrates refutes in the arguments
There is a significant difference between government and religious morals even though both are ethical authorities. These two moral authorities conflict with one another while both are to help people make sou...
Broadly, the divine command theory is a religious moral code in which God’s commands determine what human beings should or should not do. As such, it is expected for theists to subscribe to the divine command theory of morality. The deontological interpretation of the divine command theory separates actions into one of the following categories: mandatory for human beings to perform, prohibited for human beings to perform, or optional for human beings to perform. Those actions that are mandatory to perform are ones which have been expressly commanded by God. Failing to commit a mandatory action would be defying God’s commands, and thus, according to the divine command theory of morality, immoral. Actions that are prohibited are ones that God expressly commands human beings do not perform. Consequently, to perform a prohibited action would be immoral. Finally, those actions that God does not expressly command that human beings should perform or should avoid performing are optional; there are no moral implications to performing or not performing such acts. The rightness or wrongness of an action is inherently and wholly dependent upon th...
Morality and ethics have always been a large source of debate and contention between different factions of various interests, beliefs, and ideals due to its centrality and foundational role in society and civilization and incredible importance to everyday life and decision making. In many of these disputes religious belief, or a lack thereof, serves as an important driving force behind one or both sides of the argument. In the modern world, one of the bigger instances of this can be seen in the many debates between Atheistic and religious individuals about the implications of religious belief on morality. One of the most famous Atheists, Christopher Hitchens, asserts that religion is not only unnecessary for morality, but actually impedes it. In his work God is Not Great: Why Religion Poisons Everything, Christopher Hitchens challenges religious believers to “name an ethical statement or action, made or performed by a person of faith that could not have been made or performed by a non-believer”, and proudly states afterwards that many have made the attempt but no one has given him a satisfactory answer. However, the best response to this challenge is to point out the inherent flaws in his logic, the unfairness of his challenge, and the fact that Hitchens is asking the wrong question in the first place.
Truth, what is truth? This question itself has a thousand answers, no person can ever be sure of what truth is rather, truth can be justified, it can checked for reliability with strong evidences and logic. If the evidence proves to be accurate then it can be established that a certain answer is the truth. However, have we ever tried to think about what intrigues us to seek the truth? To think about a question and set foot firmly on the path of knowledge. Definitely it has! That was the very cause itself which is why this world has witnessed some of the greatest philosophers like Aristotle, Plato and Socrates etc. along with the school of thought. The ability to think and reason is one of the greatest ability humans have, it is what distinguishes us from the animals. It is what gives us free will, the ability to control our own outcomes. However, it is that ability to ‘think’ itself which has caused men to rebel with the myths and statements established about the unseen and natural forces since the beginning of time. It gave rise to questions such as: Do aliens exist? Is there a world of the unseen? Life after Death and the most popular question since the beginning of times, Does God exists? And the answer is ‘yes’. Here is how I will justify my stance.
In order to understand divine command theory we must first understand the nature of God and Morality. So we will start by taking a look at what makes an action moral. Once we understand what makes an action moral, we can then try to understand the author's’ viewpoint on the divine command theory of ethics. Understanding the viewpoint will allow us to dissect the author’s viewpoints and come up with counter-arguments that the author must then contend with.
Standing in a grand cosmic opposition to one another, the concept of good and evil has been intimately linked by many theists with divine scripture; the ideas of virtue and sin. The quotation by Fyodor Dostoyevsky, from the book The Brothers Karamazov, condenses the claim of theological naturalists that our perception of good and evil is essentially derived from the revelations of a supernatural lawgiver. Morality, according to the Cambridge dictionary of Philosophy, is defined as the differentiation of intentions, decisions, and actions between those that are good and those that are evil. Conducive to the claim of theological naturalists is the belief that divine commandments withhold humanity from plunging into lawlessness and anarchy, a state in which individual self-interest is the sole determinant of right and wrong. However, this dogmatic view proves insufficient when the false cause fallacy of assuming that godlessness necessarily leads to a moral vacuum is further
If we desire X, we ought to do Y. However, categorical imperatives are not subject to conditions. The Categorical Imperative is universally binding to all rational creatures because they are rational. Kant proposes three formulations: the Categorical Imperative in his Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morality, the Universal Law formulation, Humanity or End in Itself formulation, and Kingdom of Ends formulation. In this essay, the viability of the Universal Law formulation is tested by discussing two objections to it, mainly the idea that the moral laws are too absolute and the existence of false positives and false negatives.
God can be defined as a being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe, the principal object of faith and worship in monotheistic religions (1). There are many people that do not believe in any religion. People who do not believe in a religion have no reason for believing in a God. People who do not believe in a God and argue against the existence of God are proving something that is completely false. There is a God for numerous reasons.
Arthur, John, and Scalet, Steven, eds. Morality and Moral Controversies: Readings in Moral, Social, and Political Philosophy. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall. Eighth Edition, 2009.
Dostoevsky’s noteworthy literary works each contain similarities in theme, character development, and purpose when analyzed beyond face value. Dostoevsky’s early life and ideals, intertwined with life-changing events that shifted his ideologies, and critiques of fellow Russian writers during his time period lay the groundwork for Dostoevsky’s recurring arguments for the way which Russian society would be best-off, as well as ways in which the people of Russia would be suited to live the most fulfilling, non-corrupt lives.
When considering morality, worthy to note first is that similar to Christian ethics, morality also embodies a specifically Christian distinction. Studying a master theologian such as St. Thomas Aquinas and gathering modern perspectives from James Keenan, S. J. and David Cloutier serve to build a foundation of the high goal of Christian morality. Morality is a primary goal of the faith community, because it is the vehicle for reaching human fulfillment and happiness. Therefore, great value can be placed on foundations of Christian morality such as the breakdown of law from Aquinas, the cultivation of virtues, the role of conscience in achieving morality, and the subject of sin described by Keenan.