Conscience Created versus Innate
To what extent do you think you are dictated by your surroundings and your up-bringing? Do you claim your opinions to be your own? Do you trust your logic and your conscience? These are questions that are seldom asked by ourselves or by others. In fact, these kinds of questions could almost be considered taboo. It seems to be generally accepted that one can trust oneself, one’s authority, and one’s conscience. Upon these premises we seem to build up everything else. We rely on our beliefs. We trust them and once we decide they are true, we put our energy towards protecting them. We find justification for obeying the things and people we believe in. Whether it be our government, our parents, or any belief we hold dear, we regard our beliefs as sources of truth and direction. They make up a very significant part of what we are.
Perhaps of all of our sources of direction or guidance, our consciences receive the highest regard and trust. In many ways, we attempt to obey our consciences without fail. We hold our consciences to be the absolute truth that acts as a ground for our actions and beliefs. But what is a conscience and where does it come from? Merriam-Webster’s English Dictionary defines conscience as: “consciousness of the moral right or wrong of one’s own acts or motives” (p 171). So, your conscience serves as the part of one’s thoughts that agrees with good and disagrees with bad. It is the mechanism that allows you to know the difference between good and evil. Does this mean that if we are to follow our consciences collectively there will be no problems and no wrong? No, this is definitely not true. There is no absolute right or wrong. One finds this virtually an...
... middle of paper ...
...aken slowly and carefully.
In light of this knowledge of the inconclusiveness of our beliefs, it is a duty placed on everyone of us to be wary of trusting oneself more than you trust another. Remember, one is what one has been shown to be. One knows only what he has seen.
Bibliography:
Works Cited
Lessing, Doris. “Group Minds.” Writing and Reading Across the Curriculum, Custom
edition, University of Utah, 7th Ed. Laurence Behrens and J. Leonard Rosen, eds. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley Longman, inc. 2000, 3-5.
McConkie, Bruce R. “Morman Doctrine.” 2nd Ed. Salt Lake City, Ut: Bookcraft, inc.
1966, 156-57.
Hume, David. “Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion.” Reason and Responsibility,
11th Ed. Joel Feinberg and Russ Shafer-Landau, eds. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Group, a division of Thompson Learning, inc. 2002, 53-77.
It is crucial that every belief must be thoroughly explored and justified to avoid any future repercussions. Clifford provides two examples in which, regardless of the outcome, the party that creates a belief without comprehensive justification ends up at fault. It is possible to apply the situations in The Ethics of Belief to any cases of belief and end up with the conclusion that justification is of utmost importance. Justifying beliefs is so important because even the smallest beliefs affect others in the community, add to the global belief system, and alter the believer moral compass in future decisions.
6th ed. New York: St. James Press, 1996. Literature Resource Center. Web. 26 Jan. 2014.
Meyer, Michael, ed. The Bedford Introduction to Literature: Reading, Thinking, Writing. 5th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 1999.
Meyer, Michael. The Bedford Introduction to Literature. Ed. 8th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2008. 2189.
E. W. Ralph. (2005, September 4). Language: English. Editor: T. L.H. Edna. (2012, March 15)
Everyday, humans are faced with moral or logical decisions constantly alter the universe that surrounds them. One can assume that these decisions are fabricated based on one’s knowledge or previous experiences, and not influenced by outside factors. However, independence is merely a social construct, designed to induce the feeling of supremacy over one’s actions. Similar to animals, humans live in a society where each member must fulfil a role in the community, follow a pre-established social protocol, and follow the “herd”. Any individual who deviates from the protocol, or disagrees with the general consensus, is shunned by the community and branded as an outcast. It is this common practice that influences one’s decision making process, wondering
2nd ed. of the book. New York: St. James Press, 1995. Literature Resource Center -. Web.
Kennedy`, David, Lizabeth Cohen, and Thomas Bailey. The American Pagent. Fourteenth Edition. Boston: Wadswoth Cengage learning, 2010. 782-83. Print.
Evory, Ann, ed. Contemporary Authors New Revision Series. Vol. 7. Detroit: Gale Research Company. 1982. 451-57.
Literature. Ed. Richard Sime and Bill Wahlgreen. Dallas: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 2000. Page 739. Print.
Siegel, L. J., & Bartollas, C. (2011). Corrections today (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
Harmon, William, William Flint Thrall, Addison Hibbard, and C. Hugh Holman. A Handbook to Literature. 11th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2009. Print.
Ed. Laurence Behrens and Leonard J. Rosen. 10th ed. New York: Pearson Longman, 2008.610-612. Print.
Harmon, William, and C. Hugh Holman. A Handbook to Literature. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1996.
For years, the matter of morality has been a widespread topic of discussion, debating whether it is a product of our chemical composition or our free will. Before I get started, I will provide you with what I believe morality exactly is. Ethics is a “code of conduct,” much like a University’s student handbook, but applied to the expected morality of a larger group or society. Morals are how individuals choose to interpret and follow such code. Just as a student may not always act in complete obedience with the student handbook, humans also deviate from their ethical codes of conduct. Therefore, morals are the set of a person’s specific values and opinions formed by their interpretation of their society’s code of ethics. With this version of the meaning of morality, I believe that individual free-will and the neurological hardwiring in which we are born with both significantly influence the development of our mature human morality due to a variety of factors including: human brain development, differences in our upbringing and education, which give rise to disparities in matters such as what is considered right or wrong, decision-making processes, and our ultimate behavioral choices, and lastly, because morality cannot exist if based solely on human nature, it must also involve our own self-determination. My position that morality is not the product of one side of the debate or the other, but rather arises through the integration of both components, allows for a complete demonstration of morality in its entirety. In this system, the ambiguities present in the one-sided arguments are removed, making it easy to link any individual’s action to their personal moral accountability.