Part A Judaism presents the concept of morality as one of goodness which is engraved into the fabric of life. As “the language of morality” (Sacks, “The World’s Most Enduring Moral Voice”), the Torah comments on historical actions from a moral perspective. In his introductory article to the year 5777, Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks discusses the basic features of Jewish ethics, each inferred from key values of the Torah. By recognizing humans as free and responsible moral agents, the Torah issues a commandment to value life as sacred; consequently, the redirection of violence is crucial to attaining the ideal state of morality as propagated by the Torah. Rabbi Sacks describes humans as free moral agents, responsible for their actions and charged …show more content…
While the Torah outlaws interpersonal violence, it would be unreasonable to outlaw violence without any positive outlet. “If there [is] to be a humanity at all, G-d [must] lower His demands of mankind” (“Violence and the Sacred”). The solution to this debacle is the offering of animal sacrifices as a “concession to human nature [, which are] a substitute for violence directed against mankind” (“Violence and the Sacred”). The use of sacrifices is essential for the survival of society; it redirects man’s violent predisposition towards killing animals rather than murdering their fellow humans. Additionally, Rabbi Sacks discusses the importance of nomocratic law, as opposed to unilateral human action, such as a “direct act of revenge” (“Retribution and Revenge”). The Torah aims to accomplish this through the concept of refuge cities, which ensure the protection of the accused from goalei hadam, those wanting to avenge the death of loved ones. Sacks stresses that humans are not free to take the law upon their hands; rather, law must be placed in the hands of objective, impartial judicial institutions. The institution of refuge cities ensures the execution of justice from an impartial body and protects the accused from undue vengeance. Through the use of sacrifices and cities of refuge, the Torah successfully diverts man’s predisposition to violence away from fellow humans, beings created in the image of G-d. As such, the redirection of violence and protection of victims effectively helps humans fulfill the basic features of Jewish
Believers of the Old and New Testaments claim that violence is a sin and can only lead to more brutality and death; poet Tony Barnstone firmly agrees. In his poem “Parable in Praise of Violence” Barnstone lambastes the American obsession with violence-- that it is often triggered by inevitable events which could be handled in different manners. The speaker in “Parable in Praise of Violence” reflects on all parts of his “sinful” culture and comes to the realization that people often use violence as a way to deal with emotions of grief and anger caused by events and concepts they cannot explain.
Approximately three hundred years separate the earliest of these works, The Prince, from the most recent, Utilitarianism, and a progression is discernible in the concept of morality over this span. Machiavelli does not mention the word "morality," but his description of the trends and ideals of human political interaction allow for a reasonable deduction of the concept. Locke, too, does not use the word, but he does write of "the standard of right and wrong." In contrast, Mill writes explicitly and extensively of morality in its forms, sources, and obligations. A logical starting point in this examination is a look at their relative views of human nature.
A term paper contrived is only as good as the sources from which it is assembled. It is from these reservoirs of knowledge that the bulk of a paper is developed. That is why it is absolutely imperative that the qualities of these sources are immaculate and relevant to the subject matter. Given my subject matter, ethical obligations and violence, it is critical to note and record the viewpoint of different philosophical ethical theories through the writings of different philosophers. Excerpts form Thomas Hobbes’ The Leviathan and J.J.C. Smart in Ethics for the Modern Life, prove to be effective in both previously matriculated qualities. Both authors give arguments for different types of ethical theories that give some aspect of significant worth to my term paper topic.
On The Genealogy of Morals, Essay I refers to the second stage of human morality—the emergence of the concepts of "Good" and "Evil" as categories o...
The two extremes of our behavior, in which we may self-sacrifice, but may also take the lives of others, demonstrate our highly mixed nature. However, with the exception of “moral monsters”, most of our sinfulness rests on “unchosen evil” facilitated precisely by our human nature (Kekes 84; 66). Philosopher David Livingstone Smith identities authorization as a necessary condition for behavior contrary to our need for cooperation (127-26). When “persons in positions of authority endorse acts of violence, the perpetrator is less inclined to feel personally responsible, and therefore less guilty in performing them” (Smith 127). Stanley Milgram’s “Obedience to Authority” experiment, in which subjects delivered shocks to another person despite hearing and even seeing the suffering they were inflicting, confirms this phenomenon. When interviewed afterwards, Milgram’s subjects expressed sentiment that they did not want to continue with the experiment, but they firmly believed such decision was not up to them (Lecture 9.28.2016). Participants’ autonomy became corrupted acted in response to the powerful cultural values of loyalty, “obedience, and discipline” which often “count for more […] than individual conscience and private morality” (Gray
Humanity is taught to be moral, to do good and avoid evil. However those lessons become foolish when we ask what is morality, the thing that we are told to achieve. For many morality is doing what is good and doing good is moral. This roundabout answer may be satisfactory to some that only look at the surface of the issue, however once the digging begins the grad question of morality comes into question. While this question has been looked an infinite number of times without being universally solved certain patterns have been made in the conclusions great thinkers and scholars come to regarding morality. One of these particular ideas involves a rationalist perspective that rationality defines morality or that moral failings imply rational failings. This concept is supported by Shafer-Landau and Korsgaard while thinkers like Williams and Foot disagree with such a claim. It should be understood that morality and rationality are intertwined were a moral failing correlates with a rational failing.
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.
With reason being an aspect of human nature that makes humans particularly unique and valuable, it is not surprising why Immanuel Kant chose to also consider the value of humans as rational beings when developing his ethical system. In fact, he describes that with this very rational nature, human beings may be able to discover unconditional and universal moral laws. One’s will must simply be influenced by their moral duties, rather than motivations from one’s emotions or inclinations to comply. Nonetheless, to uncover the strength of this ethical position, Kant’s perspective on human nature as the basis for these moral theories requires analysis. With this being done, in light of observations intended to analyze human moral behavior, there
...Common Prayer pleads in The Littany "from all blindness of heart, from pride, vainglory, and hypocrisy; from envy, hatred, and malice, and all uncharitableness, Good Lord, deliver us" (Bartlett 54). Mythological and biblical texts are quite interesting to review for throughout the centuries times have changed; yet people’s nature and inclination towards these three vices remain inherent. Once we achieve a higher understanding of the warnings of pride, envy, and avarice, only then can humanity as a whole stand up to the problems and questions that plague our future. Once the deeper meanings of these parables from history are understood, the common moral code becomes evident where only a stone wall stood before. After the enriching meaning of the literature produced by the authors of past or present is interpreted, the fact is acknowledged that morality is universal.
The implementation of this new ethical paradigm allowed for Abrahamic societies to link their belief in God to common social values and responsibilities (Stark, 2001). The approach which Judaism, Christianity and Islam each take toward these common social values and responsibilities displays which values are held highest in each religion. Despite differences in each religion’s approach, common themes exist. The role of justice and forgiveness in each religion displays a common belief that man’s nature is to stray from God’s justice, but that man can ultimately connect with the divine through the contemplation and understanding of what is good and right.
Pojman associates Golding’s novel to Hobbes’s description of morality from a philosophical concept. Hobbes represents the few philosophers that relate religion and politics to philosophical dispositions. However, Pojman views such a viewpoint as one that inconsistently promotes the ideals and principles that the author would want to identify. The world presents instances which do not significantly differentiate between morality and otherwise actions of man. For example, what other people consider moral gets disapproved by other viewpoints. It is in this framework that this paper discusses how Pojman relates Golding’s novel to Hobbes’s account of morality.
It often seems that humans behave in a way that is the exact opposite of what they believe. A common theme in “Young Goodman Brown,” The Great Gatsby, Heart of Darkness, and The Ox-Bow Incident, is the idea that society and man are inherently hypocritical. Though people may outwardly appear moral, they may bear inward sin. Humanity is not black and white, and often times the people who are considered the most “good” are unable to live up to their reputation behind closed doors.
Judaism searches to find meaning in morality. “Nobody likes rules any more than they like stop lights, but without constraints, human relations would become as snarled as traffic jams” (Smith 188). Smith uses this simile to describe the human perspective of rules. It is in our nature to be social. We need interpersonal contact in order to keep our sanity. At the same time, it is quite ironic that an excess exposure to being around others socially can lead to chaos. Smith compares humans to cars driving on a road, life, and stop lights to moral laws. Without these stop lights to keep the driver and all the cars collectively, society will not be organized, and will no longer function properly. We need these stop lights, and without them, traffic
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.
Ethics can be defined as "the conscious reflection on our moral beliefs with the aim of improving, extending or refining those beliefs in some way." (Dodds, Lecture 2) Kantian moral theory and Utilitarianism are two theories that attempt to answer the ethical nature of human beings. This paper will attempt to explain how and why Kantian moral theory and Utilitarianism differ as well as discuss why I believe Kant's theory provides a more plausible account of ethics.