1.1 The Law of Human Nature
As human beings, the author says we are like other creatures on earth that are governed by laws of gravity, or certain biological laws that govern things on this earth; we have no choice but to obey. There is, though, one law that we can choose to obey or not. It is a law that we call the law of human decent behavior. It doesn't matter what part of the world we live in, Dr. Lewis says, people differ very little when it comes to right and wrong as related to the law of human decent behavior. We do not always take it into consideration when we should be doing it to other people; nonetheless, we recognize indecent behavior when we are expecting it and do not receive it. There are two things, the author points out, that all human beings all over the earth have in common: (1) this idea that they are to behave in a certain way, and they cannot really get rid of it; and (2) they do not in fact behave in that way — they know the law of nature and they break it.
1.2 Some Objections
…show more content…
Lewis says some folks object to the fact that there is a moral law. Some believe that this is no more than our herd instinct that has been developed. Other say what we call moral law is just a social convention, something that is put into us by education. The author points out that the way each opponent defends his side really shows that there is a right and wrong independent of what people think. Even though the idea of decent behavior makes us suspect whether there is a real natural law of behavior at all, the author concludes that the things we are bound to think about when we explain the differences, really prove just the
There has been a huge debate throughout the years of whether humans are ethical by nature or not. Despite Christian Keyser’s research evidence that humans are ethical by nature, the evidence from the Milgram experiment shows that we are not ethical by nature. Humans learn to be ethical through genetic disposition as well as environmental factors such as culture, socialization, and parenting. In order to understand if we are ethical or not, we need to understand the difference between being moral or ethical. Many people believe that being moral and ethical are the same thing, but these two terms are a bit different. “Morality is primarily about making correct choices, while ethics is about proper reasoning” (Philosopher, web). Morality is more
Most can agree that in, most circumstances, these actions are evil, so it can be concluded that there are certain things that a person simply ought not to do. This is the foundation of C.S. Lewis’ Moral Law argument for the existence of God. Lewis argues that every person has a sense of right and wrong moral behavior, and this sense presses upon us. This is what he calls the Law of Human nature, or Moral Law. However, unlike other laws like gravity, this law can be disobeyed. In fact, despite the fact that all people are aware of this law, they constantly disobey
Proper Order in Confucianism and as taught primarily by Mencius, the Chinese philosopher, is the conceptual theory that instructs how people can reach their highest potential of moral and material well being embodied in Mencius' conception of human nature. The theory of proper order is the primary and philosophical means to that end. Although proper order may seem in many ways philosophically abstract, Mencius' teachings of proper order in history have had lasting and tangible effects on modern East Asian politics and its relationship between the state and society, and even on a narrower level of the individual and community. In fact, the theory of proper order starts first at the individual level and from there flourishes to create a positive rippling effect throughout all of society. This profound theory and its ideals is credited with developing a social society in East Asia which acknowledges the great potential of each of its citizens, but still aspires to consider the effects of individual actions on the common good and not to just ignore the interests of society as a whole. This has helped guide East Asia through its long and colorful history and has helped to shape it into the political and economic powerhouse that it is today. But where exactly did such a significant theory which has helped to define an entire society come from? What exactly is proper order, how can we create it, and why is it needed to achieve Mencius' human nature? Most of these questions can be answered in explaining the fundamental virtue that all humans have according to Mencius, our humaneness defined in human nature.
...ple is affected by the laws and lifestyles that they follow. Many dislike the idea of change, and reject any new ideas that could alter their societies norm. Civil rights, homosexual relationships, and religious beliefs are three prime examples of how society has been changed over the course of time. Rousseau contradicted himself, stating that religion keeps the peace, however the most bloody battles in history have been over religious beliefs. Change will be adapted to one way or another, even if the morality of the people is set on two different sides. Time, politics, and war will depict the present and the future of society as a whole.
17). Lewis has already established that there is a moral standard that all men subscribe to. We know that, when describing human behavior there is more than just the facts. Right and wrong or the “law of human nature” is not determined by what is convenient or inconvenient towards another. Lewis says that happiness and safety can only be accessible in a society where everyone “plays fair”, and this is what causes people to act humanely. He says this is one of the most important certainties. The law of human nature, like the law of gravity or law of physics, is a “real law” that was made not by humans, but something outside of
Wade, N. (2007, September 18). Is ‘do unto others’ written into our genes? New York Times Retrieved from: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/18/science/18mora.html?sq&_r=0
The Human Nature Approach to Communication applies to my NCA individual code because the NCA is ethical communication that is fundamental to responsible thinking, decision making, and the development of relationships and communities within and across contexts, cultures, channels, and media. Ethical communication enhances human worth and dignity by fostering responsibility. These guidelines are similar to Human Nature approach as to finding the good in the public process by collaborating on customs, ideas, and rights, promoting, and protecting the good of public decision-making.
The human phenomena of conscience and the instinctive concepts of respect and consideration are only a few of the positive qualities that have helped shape complex cultures with all the many different belief systems throughout the world. Every different society in the world has different laws and rules that guide the behavior of their members.
When you were younger I’m sure your teacher asked you and your classmates what you wanted to be when you grew up. I remember some of my classmates wanting to be a fireman, a police officer or a doctor. I wanted to be an educator. Being the naive and carefree child that I was, I had no knowledge of what responsibilities or rules would be packaged into this career. Now that I am in college earning my Bachelors in Elementary Education, my perspective of how a teacher should act and care for their students. As you continue reading, I will discuss my professional responsibility, the code of ethics I will follow, and the high moral standard that I set for myself.
The concept of liberty stems from the system of natural law. It is highly dependent on the belief in natural law, in regards to three different aspects. First, the foundation of both concepts. The natural law has been influential in many ways, therefore concepts can be developed or derived from such a system. Secondly, the ideas found in liberty are similar to those found in the natural law in regards to the law being controlled by an entity. Finally, for protection against arbitrary offense to ensure a state of equality. This concept depends on natural law by representing similar principles on infringement of rights. Ultimately, liberty can be seen as a concept adapted from the system of natural law in order to keep the same principles and
Does life ever seem pointless and discouraging? In Albert Camus’s “The Myth of Sisyphus,” Camus describes the correlation between Sisyphus’s fate and the human condition. In the selection, everyday is the same for Sisyphus. Sisyphus is condemned to rolling a rock up a mountain for eternity. Camus’s “The Myth of Sisyphus” forces one to contemplate Sisyphus’s fate, how it relates to the human condition, and how it makes the writer feel about her part in life.
A society that is ruled by liberty contains morals, morals that come with rights that must be respected in order to preserve integrity. In his article “A Right to do Wrong”, Ethics, vol. 92 (1981), pp. 21-39, Jeremy Waldron argues that if people in a society take moral rights seriously they must accept an individuals “right to do wrong” from a moral perspective. Having a choice to do wrong from a moral point of view creates diversity in a society which lead’s to development in the society as a whole. Waldron offers a paradox to explain his position on individuals having a moral right to act in ways that might be seen as wrong from a moral point of view. I will explain and outline Jeremy Waldron’s position on the idea of individuals having the moral right to do wrong, and I will also evaluate Jeremy Waldron’s position and demonstrate if there is really such a moral right using my views that will be enhanced by John Stewart Mill views.
the laws of man and kept in check by society's own norms. The human struggle to
It holds that, as a matter of fact, moral beliefs and practices vary between cultures (and sometimes between groups within a single society). For instance, some societies condemn homosexuality; others accept it; in some cultures a student who corrects a teacher would be thought to be disrespectful; elsewhere such behavior might be encouraged. The rules, principles and standards that constitute a morality differ in different religions, and cultures, just as they differ historically. The morality of ancient Greece was not the morality of feudal Europe or contemporary American; the morality of the Trobriand Islanders is not the same as the morality of the Kwakiutl Indians (Barnet, 2008). In this paper I intend to argue that moral reasoning
Humans have notably different ethical standards which dictate what is or isn’t correct. Those standards are shared and followed by a group of people. For example, the concept of killing is not unknown. The typical response is to punish the one who commits that “crime,” even if that person was “right” to do so. However, killing may not seem like a crime to some people. Rather, to them killing is necessary for protection. Given that there are many cultures in the world, one can assume that each of those cultures is not like the other. They must all have their own ethical standards. In addition, it is suggested that a person refrains from assuming that one’s ethical standards are superior or inferior to another person’s standards. Cultural Relativism