Last semester, we talked in great detail about how the human brain has a lens on reality, so as to function to the highest degree. I believe this is sort of how morality works. Morality also has a lens based on an individual human's beliefs, maybe not always allowing people to flourish. The culture or religion has a great deal of impact on a person's beliefs, which leads to differences in morality. Several articles mentioned different actions based on beliefs from various faiths like Islam and what not, and how the people who believe in these faiths commit actions that in different societies are seen as immoral. So, while a universal moral code may allow the human race to flourish to the best of its ability, how do we go about deciding who
There are no definite boundaries, standards or definition to determine whether an action is considered moral. The same action under different circumstance or environment may result in different beliefs whether it’s moral or immoral. Something that's moral doesn't necessarily means it's ethical either. What makes a moral action moral is that the person performing the action did it with good intention and foresees a positive outcome. Even though, the action may have been unethical or puts another person at risk. Referring to Julie’s post about stealing medicine to save a life which could result in taking away someone else's life. In an ideal world, a life is a life, no one’s life is more precious or valuable than someone else’s life. But we are
On one hand people accept that there are universal moral principles that are normal in every culture. But, on the other hand people feel that cultural differences should be looked upon with sensitivity and tolerance (Bock, 2014). You can look at such cultural and perhaps religious differences as circumcision in both men and women (Bock, 2014). In the U.S. you can abortions as an example of moral and religious choice but in other countries they feel it is morally and ethically correct to kill female babies when they are born (Bock,
A lot of different cultures do base what is morally right and wrong off of their religion, and if one religion differs in what they value from another, then their idea of what is morally right and wrong can differ. This leads in to my second premise which is that these different beliefs show that there are no universally correct moral standards. In support of this premise, as I have previously stated, different cultures do follow different religions and different religions are formed off of the idea that they do not agree with what another religion believes so they form their own, if they believed the same thing then they would just join. This is seen in history when Martin Luther broke away from the Roman Catholic church because of their corrupt policies and other reasons and formed the Protestant branch of Christianity. This is also proven by the stark differences in today’s religions like Muslim beliefs and Jewish beliefs
Dwelling in the deepest recesses of the mind, hidden in the various cortexes of the brain, the fundamental nature of every human lurks seeping into the actions of the individual. Can morality ever dictate a society? The individual contradicts the group and morals become subjective. Morals form ethics, ethics form laws, but all must have nearly universal agreement in order to be validated. Due to this unavoidable variation of an individual’s morals the necessary consensus of morals prevents the establishment of a true moral based society.
James Rachels' article, "Morality is Not Relative," is incorrect, he provides arguments that cannot logically be applied or have no bearing on the statement of contention. His argument, seems to favor some of the ideas set forth in cultural relativism, but he has issues with other parts that make cultural relativism what it is.
Labeling what morality is can be fairly difficult due to the mass distinctions between everybody’s individual definitions. Being a moral being, looks different for everybody. Regardless of religion, morals are something anyone can obtain in their lives. Religion or a certain culture is not required to be a moral person, morality can be achieved by each and everyone. While living a moral life, one must have define what morality
Morality is the balance between what is good and what is bad in an individual's mind. As long as scientists have been performing experiments, there has always been the issue of morality while trying to help and solve issues. The issue scientists and researchers often must wonder is not if an experiment can be completed, but if it should be completed. Morality brings in the thought of what could happen with the completion of certain experiments and why some should not be completed. Morality is a necessary factor when conducting experiments with new laws and regulations consistently being implemented to deter or extinguish experiments that may have negative side effects upon living organisms. It is critical to think about the well being of living organisms and how humans have drastically changed the world in such a short amount of time.
Where this study and the field in general lack is the knowledge of how these influences effect moral thought and behaviour in conflict in the real world. Graham et al. suggest that implementing a combination of individual and cultural differences as well as the situational determinants may help the two major challenges. The first is predicting when and for whom will moral judgements relate to their displayed moral behaviour, and secondly, predicting a more complete list of morally relevant behaviours (Graham, Meindl, & Beall, 2012). The assumptions that Graham et al. make in their paper unheeded of the cultural differences as Henrich et al. discussed. This prevents the common person from understanding the full implications of a cultural and individual differences and how it can combine with the situational determinants to produce a better and clearer image of what thought processes exactly go into the judgements that are manifested outwardly as moral behaviours, which is why more studies should take place in 'untraditional'
Humans are born with an innate ability to have high morality based on the Natural law Theory as opposed to the Divine Command Theory. Our instincts towards morality come from within ourselves. Fundamentally we have seven basic tools that produce our survival and morality so it’s up to us to utilize them to the fullest in a positive manner. Our morality can be supported by outside influence such as our religion but with so many religions and Gods throughout the world, it would be overwhelming to decide which is ultimately making our choices towards good morality. That has to come from within
Morality only exists if we believe in God; therefore if God doesn’t exist there is no morality. There have been so many evil acts committed in the name of God that it is difficult to maintain that a belief in God equates to morality. There are situations that happen every day where decisions are made based off of human rights that contradict the word of God. Morality comes from within, it is an understanding of right versus wrong and the ability to choose what is right. Knowing all this a belief in God is not a requirement for a person to be moral. (Mosser, 2011)
Many things can contribute to what you think is morally right or wrong. Religion, for example, may create a barrier on to what extent you do something. Some religions set rules, or guidelines on which they limit what people do. Cultures, as well, contribute to people’s decisions. Many times our values and ethics disagree with different people who hold different
Is it feasible to find a method which we can use to evaluate moral decisions and prove whether a person acted morally right or wrong? Philosophers have come up with a number of unique views which attempt to be the universal standard for evaluating these decisions, yet others tend to think that cultural relativism is the only answer to this issue. Cultural relativism is the idea that moral rights and wrongs change based on the culture that you are immersed in. In other words, what is considered to be morally right in one culture may be considered to be morally wrong in another culture. The challenge is devising a method which can be a universal standard. By analyzing some of the greatest views created by philosophers, we can attempt
Everyday we are tested as individuals to make the right choice. How we view ourselves as individuals and how others view us are directly correlated to our moral decision-making. But morals are somewhat misleading. What might be a wrong decision for one person might be a solution to another. So how do we define morals? Do we follow Gods’ moral rules because to do so would increase out likelihood of obtaining salvation in the afterlife? Or is it simpler than that. Is God going to deny our entrance into heaven because we have run a stop sign here and there? No. I believe our moral values are much simpler than that. I believe that our moral decision-making comes from our upbringing of what is right or wrong. Our parents and