Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Religion and morality
The role of religion in influencing morality in society
Relationship between religion and morality
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Religion and morality
defining souls as distinct from bodies and minds that do not communicate through the channel of logic with evil but with evol. The 3rd order good of free will, I argue, is dualistic to the 3rd order evol of death. Death is an evol that the soul communicates healthy with the soul and unhealthy with the mind-body. Think about the time you lost a love one and questioned god, or your higher power, from an intellectual standpoint? You may have asked, why did god take your loved one? Logically god wont respond to you cries, for many have proclaimed that god, or your higher power, does not communicate with everyone in the same manner, and that manner does not involve immediate reciprocity.
The word ‘evol’ has not been defined as a word and thus does
…show more content…
As Mackie has already argued the humans free will has created these levels of evils that are suppose to provide justification for evil, 1st order evil, second order good, 3rd order good. Let’s consider the 1st order evil of pain, which can be argued to be a mental faculty or a bodily faculty. However, given the definition of the body that I have provided pain is an embodied experience that responds bodily based upon attitudes it has as propositions concerning religious beliefs. Therefore the soul of an individual, separate from the body does not respond to the first order evil of pain because they communicate to two separate parts of a person. The second order good that is the better of the 1st order evil, in this instance pleasure, would be again an embodied process that is influenced from attitudes based upon propositions about religious beliefs. Consider the twenty-five year old who got into a bad car accident and experience the 1st order evil, that is also a natural evil, of pain and if wallowing in tears and anguish. The phenomenon of this embodiment is experienced through the corporeal part of the body that includes the mind and the physical body. Therefore, when there is an embodiment of pleasure the same will occur, there will be joy and happiness given the experience that is being embodied by the individual. What I am trying to show is that the faculties which all respond to reason are active during experiencing the types of evils that the corporeal parts of the mind communicate through. They are active because that girl has had a proposition, religious or non religious, that has manifested some sort of attitude that influenced the content of her belief of pain and pleasure. As an effect, at the time the twenty-five girl got into the car
In the beginning of Death, Nagel presented the question of whether it is a bad thing to die. He furnished two positions on the subject. The first position is that life is all one possesses and to lose life is the greatest loss one can encounter. The second position is that death is a blank, not an unimaginable condition, that has no positive or negative value whatsoever. Stating his aim to be considering whether death is in itself an evil, Nagel clarified that the state of being dead, or nonexistent, is not in itself evil for several reasons. First, death is not an evil that one is able to accumulate more of. A person cannot receive a larger portion of death no matter how long they have been in that state. Secondly, one would not regard temporary life suspension as harmful. In the case of long-term suspended animation or freezing, one can view this as a continuation of their present life. Thirdly, few people regard the long period of time before their birth as a misfortune. From these points, Nagel concluded that humanity does not object to death because it involves indeterminable periods of nonexistence. He then proposed that if death is an evil at all, it can only be because of what it deprives us of, since it has no positive features. He did not, however, agree with the idea that death is bad because it brings an end to all the good things in life. Nagel formulated that if all good and bad life experiences were removed, what i...
A second and stronger objection to Mackie’s version of the problem of evil is explained to us using the terms 1st and 2nd order goods and evils. 1st order goods/evils are purely physical. Examples are pleasure and pain, happiness and misery. It is claimed by many theists that 1st order evils such as pain and suffering are necessary for 2nd order goods like courage and charity. However there exists what Mackie calls a “fatal objection” to this claim and that is that along with 2nd order goods there must also exist 2nd order evil...
The problem of evil is a difficult objection to contend with for theists. Indeed, major crises of faith can occur after observing or experiencing the wide variety and depths of suffering in the world. It also stands that these “evils” of suffering call into question the existence of an omnibenevolent and omnipotent God of the Judeo-Christian tradition. The “greater good defense” tries to account for some of the issues presented, but still has flaws of its own.
Death as a weak entity that has no real power, because after we die, we
Thomas Nagel begins his collection of essays with a most intriguing discussion about death. Death being one of the most obviously important subjects of contemplation, Nagel takes an interesting approach as he tries to define the truth as to whether death is, or is not, a harm for that individual. Nagel does a brilliant job in attacking this issue from all sides and viewpoints, and it only makes sense that he does it this way in order to make his own observations more credible.
In Thomas Nagel’s “Death,” he questions whether death is a bad thing, if it is assumed that death is the permanent end of our existence. Besides addressing whether death is a bad thing, Nagel focuses on whether or not it is something that people should be fearful of. He also explores whether death is evil. Death is defined as permanent death, without any form of consciousness, while evil is defined as the deprivation of some quality or characteristic. In his conclusion, he reaffirms that conscious existence ends at death and that there is no subject to experience death and death ultimately deprives a person of life. Therefore, he states that Death actually deprives a person of conscious existence and the ability to experience. The ability to experience is open ended and future oriented. If a person cannot permanently experience in the future, it is a bad or an evil. A person is harmed by deprivation. Finally, he claims that death is an evil and a person is harmed even though the person does not experience the harm.
God is the source of evil. He created natural evil, and gave humans the ability to do moral evil by giving them a free will. However, had he not given people free will, then their actions would not be good or evil; nor could God reward or punish man for his actions since they had no choice in what to do. Therefore, by giving humans choice and free will, God allowed humanity to decide whether to reward themselves with temporary physical goods, and suffer in the long run from unhappiness, or forsake bodily pleasures for eternal happiness.
...erstand the nature of the soul are, as Epicurus says "incomparably stronger than other men" (Letter to Herodotus 83), since they will be able to understand and set aside their fears and worries about themselves after death.
souls: in short, behaving as if you were in Heaven, where there are no third-
Evil is a metaphysical term used to describe the thoughts and actions of humans that are seen as morally wrong or ‘bad’. In extreme cases even a person can be labelled as overall evil, such as Adolf Hitler and Jeffrey Dahmer. Previously, it has been thought that a person has the ability to choose between being ‘good’ or ‘evil’ and that they simply make this decision based upon what pleases them. Recently, however, neuroscientists have shed some light upon the physical explanations of human thought and action. In this essay I argue that evil does not exist, and that actions and thoughts previously termed ‘evil’ are in fact malfunctions of the human brain.
For years a common area of discussion among thinkers and philosophers in regards to religious is that of the traditional idea of God. If the traditional idea of God is true then how can evil exist. The existence of evil challenges this idea because if God knows about the suffering and would stop it but can not stop it that would imply God is not omnipotent or all powerful. If God is able to stop the suffering and would want to but does not know about it that would imply God is not omniscient or all knowing. If God knows about the suffering and is able to stop it but does not wish to assuage the pain that
Through the course of these last few weeks, we as a class have discussed the Soul, both in concept, and as it applies in terms of our readings of The Phaedo and as a philosophical construct. But the questions involved in that: In the ideas of good, of living a ‘good’ life and getting ‘rid of the body and of their wickedness’, as ‘there is no escape from evil’, (Phaedo, 107c), in whether or not the soul is immortal, or if our bodies themselves get in the way of some higher form of knowledge, or even of the importance of philosophy itself are rather complex, simultaneously broad and specific, and more than a little messy. While I discuss these aspects, the singular question that I feel applies to this is, in a sort of nihilistic fashion, does
The soul can be defined as a perennial enigma that one may never understand. But many people rose to the challenge of effectively explaining just what the soul is about, along with outlining its desires. Three of these people are Plato, Aristotle, and Augustine. Even though all three had distinctive views, the similarities between their views are strikingly vivid. The soul indeed is an enigma to mankind and the only rational explanation of its being is yet to come and may never arrive.
Magesa suggests not to use the abstract Christian concept of sin but to speak of ‘wrong-doing’ or ‘destruction of life’. Evil is always attached ...
The human being is seen as 2 dimensional which includes the body and soul. The soul consists of 3 parts: it is alive, reason/intellect, and lastly the decision maker also known as the will. In order to make a will a good will, we must function with reason but reason can become corrupted. Its job is to gather the information, connect the dots, and present the evidence to the will. Reason is only a helper in determining if a will is good. Qualities of the mind can be extremely harmful if the will is not good. To make it good, we must act from a sense of duty, which causes our actions to be good.