More handpicked essays just for you.
Comparison between the three ethical theories
The connection between Religion and Morality
Compare and contrast two ethical theories
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
1. Devine Command Theory is the theory is that morality is dependent on God (Austin). God makes commands and people live by His word and are dependent on His morals for their way of life. In this Theory God makes his commands and people use this to live moral lives. There are so many religions out there that sometimes people are opposed to DCT, just because God said they should do it. There are many philosophers that are for and against The Devine Command Theory. The strength that I see in DCT is that it gives people something to believe in, not just because he said so, but because they have faith in God and he has everyone’s best interest at heart. With God having a moral character, it gives people something to strive for; being like God. …show more content…
According to the Immanuel Kant, people have a moral responsibility to do good. Kantian Moral theory says that reason and morality go hand in hand, it says that you cannot have one without the other. The honor code says that each person will do good according to the Kantian theory. According to Clark and Poortenga Kant and Thomas Hobbs, have similar views in that people look out for themselves more than for others. Kant’s theory says that goodwill is the only good that is unconditional. A goodwill is an act that is good because it is acted out of duty and because it is the right thing to do. (Clark and Poortenga, 2003) One moral dilemma I found is that morally I feel obligated to invite my extended family over for Thanksgiving, while my immediate family, (my husband and children) do not want them over because they have been very unkind to me, even though I have always gone out of my way to help them. I cannot help but feel like I will lose either way. If I invite them (like I know I should) I make my immediate family unhappy and if I do not invite them I feel like I am not doing my duty as the head of the family. So what is good for everyone in this instance is to invite them and have my husband and children be happy whether they are there or not. So by inviting them I am doing my duty and showing my goodwill, even though they will not appreciate my
From that opinion, one may assert that morals themselves are not absolute. Still, deontological moral theory provides a strong base for making correct decisions. There are few realistic exceptions to the theory and one can easily notice when an exception is to be made. So, knowing that deontology creates a valuable beginning for a strong moral theory, one can simply interpret the theory less strictly.
185). I was shown early on that doing for others is satisfying. Unfortunately I believe this is a dying virtue. Every year our 4-H club has a brat and hamburger fundraiser for our club at the local grocery store. I encourage the children to go and ask patrons if they can help them with their groceries. We encourage community service and have several projects yearly to encourage stronger moral acts and virtues among our members. Kyte states, “A family, a business, or a community that is concerned about ethics would be well advised to focus first on building a culture of good relationships by focusing on character” (2012, p. 211). That character building is what we need to build in our children and in ourselves.
Overall Kant’s concepts of ‘The Good Will’ and ‘The Categorical Imperative’ can be applied to any situation. His ideas of moral law, good will, duty, maxims, and universal law all intertwine to support his belief. As a whole his concept enables the Kingdom of Ends, which is the desired result of the morality of humanity. Everyone is to treat everyone based upon true good will actions instead of personal gains, this way no one gets used. In all Kant trusts if this is achieved there will be universal peace across humanity.
The divine command theory is rooted in the idea that morality was created by God. This means that an action is considered moral simply because God commanded it, and immoral simply because God forbade it. This theory argues that since no one person can be considered perfect, it is up to a higher power to create a moral code suitable for humanity. By stating what is right and wrong, God has absolute power in creating an ideal code of conduct. Additionally, the divine command theory offers an incentive to keep its followers steered toward righteous living. A person who lives a pure, conscientious, and ethical life (in the eyes of God) is rewarded with an afterlife filled with pleasure while a person who lives a wicked life is doomed to everlasting
The divine command theorist’s presumed critique of the divine will theory is twofold: first, what would happen in an instance in which the command and the will of God are not expressing the same thing? If God’s commands are his only way of communicating intent, but his commands are not perfect reflections of his intention, then how can human beings possibly know what actions are morally mandatory or prohibited? Second, in such an instance, what is the point of a command if not to communicate God’s will? The divine command theorist would charge that the point of a command under the divine will theory becomes arbitrary, and theists altogether reject the notion that God ever acts arbitrarily.
The Divine Command Theory is a form of a larger theory known as the Natural Law Theory. The Natural Law theory states that laws are comprised of reason, religion, as well as the nature of all things. Similar to the Divine Command theory, only morally sound actions or actions justified by a prior example such as religion, are only acceptable. It is argued that Natural Law Theory differentiates itself from the Divine Command theory in that most forms of the Natural Law Theory find justification for actions through reason and not revelation. That being said, the
Divine Command Theory is a religious approach to morality. The basis of this theory is that God is the lawmaker and as devout free agents, we choose to follow His commands. Morality is determined by the commandments of God. Morally right is considered as that which is commanded by God and morally wrong is that which is forbidden by God (Rachels, p.50). God does not compel us to obey His commands and therefore this theory contains some attractive features.
Kantians believe that we should avoid treating others as mere means.(877) In other words we should not make false promises, physically force a person to do what we want, use threats, or take advantage of someone’s desperate situation and make unjust offers.(877-878) These are examples of treating people as mere means because these people will not have the opportunity to make a reasonable choice for themselves. Either because they don’t have the complete information, their wellbeing is on the line, or simply because there is no just offer on the table. We are also to treat others as an end in themselves(878), meaning that we have to respect their autonomy, and their freedom to make choices for themselves. But according to O’Neil it’s not enough to treat others as an end in themselves. In her duty of beneficence she argues that we cannot treat others as end in themselves if they have limited rationality or autonomy (878-879). She derives her idea from Kant’s idea of imperfect duty which aims to promote helping others to reach their potential.(). Therefor based on these principles it makes sense for us to help reduce world famine, because the people affected by this issues are very venerable, and their autonomy is undermined. The only way to ensure that they are treated as rational human beings is if we helped them. It’s important to
This theory, when put into practice, does hold a good amount of truth to it. It is only logical to look towards the actions of the people who have the qualities you admire. However, like Kant’s theory, I believe virtue ethics is also covered by the Divine Command theory. Many look towards the examples of the faithful ones listed in the Bible in order to guide their actions today. The problem with virtue ethics is then filled by the Divine Command theory. This is true because virtue ethics lacks a moral principle to define whether the actions of one label them to be virtuous. The actions of the faithful ones in the Bible are regarded as virtuous because they follow God’s standards. Without the divine command theory, virtue ethics is caught in a paradox. The right thing to do is what the good person does and the good person is the one doing the right thing. Judging what is virtuous can be very subjective in some instances. On top of this, even the virtuous people can still do the wrong things. It is nearly impossible to rely just on the actions of others to dictate for ourselves what the morally right thing is to do without crossing over with another ethical
Divine Command Theory is an act that is morally required just because it is commanded by God and immoral just because God forbids it. The main question for DCT is, “ Does God command actions because they are morally right, or are actions morally right because God commands them?” it is said that prior to God's declaration of morals nothing was right or wrong. So, did God have reasons for his decisions? The answer for example is, that God recognizes what is already bad about torture, there is something in its nature that makes it wrong, since God wants us to be good he orders us not to attempt such actions.
Everything a person does is governed by a moral code or principle of behavior. There are people who do not agree with things done by other people, and vice versa. Someone who runs a business might decide to charge customers extra to increase profits. That person can understand that what they are doing is wrong, but follows his moral code of “whatever the customers doesn’t know, won’t hurt them.” That person can increase profits by 10% by doing so, but runs the risk of losing their business if ever caught. And then you have someone who puts their customers first and would never dare to do any harm to anyone because they wouldn’t like if someone did that to them. This is known as a deontological moral theory of Kantian duty ethics.
Both Kantian and virtue ethicists have differing views about what it takes to be a good person. Kantian ethicists believe that being a good person is strictly a matter of them having a “good will.” On the other hand, virtue ethicists believe that being a good person is a matter of having a good character, or being naturally inclined to do the right thing. Both sides provide valid arguments as to what is the most important when it comes to determining what a person good. My purpose in writing this paper is to distinguish between Kantian ethics and virtue ethics, and to then, show which theory is most accurate.
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.
This is an essay about the different theories of intelligence; it will discuss which theory is best at determining intelligence in my opinion. The information provided will help describe the pros and cons of each of the theories being used to define intelligence, explain why is it important to assess children’s intelligence, and discuss the type of intelligence I possess. The different theories of intelligence are complex and understanding the elements of each can help an individual choose the one that they believe is the best for determining intelligence. Comparing the positive and the negative elements of each theory of intelligence will allow an individual to see both sides of the theory and the flaws that may be twisted
The Theory of Natural Law, defined in three aspects, there being a natural order in the world, everything having a purpose and how things are and how things ought to be. This theory also states that humans can distinguish between what is right or wrong through human reason/moral knowledge. On the other hand, the Divine Command Theory is a view of morality and believes that what’s right or wrong is set by God’s moral commands. God’s commands tell us what is morally obligatory, permitted and wrong.