Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: ethics mean
Ethical Monotheism
The word ‘ethical’ as defined by the Chambers Pocket Dictionary means
“1. Of or concerning morals, justice or duty. 2. Morally right”. The
word monotheism is defined as “the belief that there is only one
God”. So, what is meant by the phrase ‘ethical monotheism’?
The majority of Jewish people believe that there is some sort of God
out there, a higher being than themselves. Rabbi Dr Louie Jacobs says
this is “because they have been taught by their ancestors”; perhaps
suggesting that it is down to tradition. However, despite this when
their belief is challenged, “They are able to show that it is not
blind and unthinking”.
Atheists don’t believe that any form of a God exists; they believe
that everything (the world and its inhabitants etc) just appeared. The
atheistic view says: “there is no explanation”. But this means that
atoms and molecules just happened to collide by chance and that the
particular combinations and chemical reactions that followed resulted
in not only the “material universe” but furthermore the “human mind…
all beauty, and art, all music and goodness, all science, all
philosophy, all the kindness and generosity of which people are
capable, all the protests against evil and the struggle for justice,
righteousness, and compassion”.
Surely all of humanity could not have been a scientific accident? Dr
Rabbi Louie Jacobs answers this question with another question, “but
how can the universe be reasonable unless there is a mind in the
universe”.
Belief in one God is at times testing. The existence of a God is
always questioned, but it is questioned even more so at times of
suffering. As Rabbi Dr Louie Jacobs comments “If God exists… how and
why could such a Being tolerate all the pain, misery, and anguish that
is often the lot of humanity”.
The problem of reconciling an omnipotent, perfectly just, perfectly benevolent god with a world full of evil and suffering has plagued believers since the beginning of religious thought. Atheists often site this paradox in order to demonstrate that such a god cannot exist and, therefore, that theism is an invalid position. Theodicy is a branch of philosophy that seeks to defend religion by reconciling the supposed existence of an omnipotent, perfectly just God with the presence of evil and suffering in the world. In fact, the word “theodicy” consists of the Greek words “theos,” or God, and “dike,” or justice (Knox 1981, 1). Thus, theodicy seeks to find a sense of divine justice in a world filled with suffering.
In this philosophical essay regarding God and the controversial existence of objective morality, I will argue in favour of Shafer-Landau’s conclusion that if you are an atheist, then you should object the proposition that objective morality requires the existence of God. In addition, for Shafer-Landau’s argument to make sense, I will be mentioning the Argument from Atheism, a classical argument based upon moral skepticism. I will also be providing Shafer-Landau’s arguments in objection to the Argument of Atheism along with key pieces of terminology and definitions which are crucial to understanding his argument in support of objective morality. Lastly, I will be providing possible theistic and atheistic objections against Shafer-Landau’s criticisms
Between 600 BCE and 600 CE, religion played an important role in the social order of the Middle East. The introduction of monotheistic religions challenged earlier polytheistic religions and caused people to have faith in in one almighty god. Social order was affected by these new understandings because people began to believe that those who sided with God would be granted everlasting life while those who were on the side of evil were sentenced to eternal punishment.
Three equals one. Out of all of the statements made by the Christian faith, perhaps none is more confusing. The Doctrine of the Trinity has been questioned for decades and many Christians do not even understand it. Colin E. Gunton argues that this does not have to be so. Instead, he calls the Western Church to learn from Eastern Orthodoxy and allow Trinitarian thinking to permeate every aspect of the church. It is when the Western Church embarrasses “The Forgotten Trinity” (the name of the chapter) in thinking and in worship, that we not only learn the nature of God, but how we should live in light of it.
When we discuss morality we know that it is a code of values that seem to guide our choices and actions. Choices and actions play a significant role in determining the purpose and course of a person’s life. In the case of “Jim and the Indians”, Jim faces a terrible dilemma to which any solution is morbid. On one hand, Jim can choose to ignore the captain’s suggestion and let the whole group of Indians be executed. Alternatively, he may decide upon sacrificing one Indian for the sake of saving the rest. Both options involve taking of person’s life. Regarding what should Jim do in this circumstance, there are two approaches according for Jim’s dilemma that should be examined. By looking into the Deontological moral theory and the moral theory of Consequentialism we can see what determines an action that is morally required.
I chose to write about Aristotle and his beliefs about how the virtuous human being needs friends from Book VIII from Nicomachean Ethics. In this essay I will talk about the three different kinds of friendship that (Utility, Pleasure, and Goodness) that Aristotle claims exist. I will also discuss later in my paper why Aristotle believes that Goodness is the best type of friendship over Utility or Pleasure. In addition to that I will also talk about the similarities and differences that these three friendships share between one another. And lastly I will argue why I personally agree with Aristotle and his feelings on how friendship and virtue go hand in hand and depend on each other.
Christianity is considered “two religious”, which contains “head” and “heart” (Tallon, 113). “Head” is relate to cool and rational practices of Christianity, and “heart” is the “warm and emotional” practices. Apollo, the god of reason, represents “form, structure, rational thoughts”, and Dionysian represents “enthusiasm and ectasy”(Tallon,114). Christain’s thoughts varied because they have different approaches to Christianity. Some people would interact with Christianity by having in rational ways, such as watching a sculpture of Jesus since it takes serious thinking to build a formal image of Jesus. Some people interact with Christianity by emotional approaches, for example, some christians would sing psalms which appeals to instinctive chaotic emotions. The emotions in Christianity plays an “interactive” role because it allows christians communicate with each other.
Hinduism is a polytheistic religion with countless Gods and Deities, that is now the third most followed religion in the world, after Christianity and Islam. The word “hindu” originated from the Sanskrit word “Sindhu” which is a historical name of the longest river in Asia, northwest of India. Hinduism is unique, the only religion without a founder, no one scripture, and it is without a specific set of rules and expectations. It is often described as being a way of life, unlike other religions, and is said to be an assortment of different religious, philosophical ideas, and cultural practices that began in India. While it doesn’t have specific teachings, it does have sacred texts, the Sanatana Dharma, otherwise known as “The Eternal Teaching”.
Around the time after Jesus’ resurrection, Christians were confused and they needed answers. Jesus was just arisen from the dead. The Church now had Jesus and God to look to, but who was the leader of it all? Who were they to worship? Where does the Spirit fit into all of this? After many questions, they looked to Scripture. Christians have had the belief of Monotheism and that there is One God. Yet, it wasn’t until the Church looked to Scripture that they pieced together what is now known as the Holy Trinity.
Over time, this concept that morality cannot be separate from God has encountered perpetual doubt from several atheists. The Bible tells us in Luke 18:19 that, “No one is good – except God alone” (Bible). From this, a believer might argue that we are incapable of being good, but by God’s grace and mercy we can be better. Atheists who speak in terms of good and evil have manipulated religious dialogue in their favor; they ha...
One can say that a person’s autonomy is proof enough to decide if they choose to discontinue life saving treatment. Be that as it may, when can a medical professional decide to ignore the patient’s request? To answer this question I will be using the principlist method argue when it is necessary for a medical professional to do what is in the best interest of the patient, even if it means violating their autonomy. Autonomy, or respecting one’s actions or choices, is one of the four main principles of morality. Autonomy is a major component of informed consent and to give consent is to be competent. Thus, I will be providing information of what it means to be competent. The second principle of morality is beneficence or the obligation to help
Abrahamic largest religions are known to be Judaism, Christianity and Islam because they follow the original history to their own bond with God. However they also define as monotheistic as they hold their own belief and sacred texts, which are Torah, The Bible and the Quran respectively. Monotheistic interpret The Creation Story, leading their believers to follow their gender roles and function. This has a significant relationship to Harvey Cox’s quote about his understanding of this world and what all human beings should live by. Religion has provided us with The Creation Story, “All human being have an innate need to hear and tell stories and to have a story to live by. Religion, whatever else it has done, has provided one of the main ways of meeting this abiding need”.
Virtue Ethics Virtue ethics is a theory used to make moral decisions. It does not rely on religion, society or culture; it only depends on the individuals themselves. The main philosopher of Virtue Ethics is Aristotle. The. His theory was originally introduced in ancient Greek.
In God and Objective morality: A debate, Craig interprets the objective morality and states that the existence of God is the only foundation of objective morality. My purpose of this paper is to argue against Craig’s argument. My thesis is objective morality does exist in society to both theists and atheist, and the foundation of the moral value to individuals does not have to be God. For an atheist, God is also an abstract and not reliable foundation. Social harmony is the general foundation of moral value in modern society, and it is objective without the existence of God. In §1, I present the Craig’s argument and explain the motivation of each premise. §2, I present my critique and show that Craig’s argument fails. In §3, I defend against possible rebuttal.
Every day we are confronted with questions of right and wrong. These questions can appear to be very simple (Is it always wrong to lie?), as well as very complicated (Is it ever right to go to war?). Ethics is the study of those questions and suggests various ways we might solve them. Here we will look at three traditional theories that have a long history and that provide a great deal of guidance in struggling with moral problems; we will also see that each theory has its own difficulties. Ethics can offer a great deal of insight into the issues of right and wrong; however, we will also discover that ethics generally won’t provide a simple solution on which everyone can agree (Mosser, 2013).