Cullen Lemieux Period 2 World literature Mr. Neely Ram’s Morality Many people struggle or debate over the topic of morality, and many people are mistaken as to who really judges what is moral or immoral. The only person who can decide whether an act is morally right or wrong is God. Within Slumdog Millionaire, there are many actions and ideas that can be considered morally good or morally bad according to the Christian views of morality. Ram Muhammad Thomas is debated over when it comes to the topic
duty and one’s right to live as well as possible. Early Western philosophers, including Plato and Aristotle, have suggested that to live well is to live morally. However, as argued by Dworkin in his essay “What is a Good Life?” high morality does not necessarily equate a high standard of living. Indeed, following austere morals and ethics may lead to an unsatisfying life. For instance, adopting Singer’s approach to absolute morality, as outlined in “Famine, Affluence, and Morality” would pose a significant
concept is intentional doing; if a person is able to do things internationally then he or she qualifies to be a human according to the theory. The founder of this theory states that this is the main reason why chimpanzees are not categorized as human beings (DeGrazia 38). Applying it in the book, Kathy was making her decisions intentionally. For example, she decided on become Tommy’s carer intentionally. She also worked as a care in her life out of her intentions. This shows that the author of the book
relies on the consequences of an action in order to distinguish whether or not something is morally acceptable. Deontology considers the morality of an action by one’s reason for doing a certain deed. Lastly, virtue ethics bases morality off of virtuous character, and how a virtuous person would act given a certain predicament. Ultimately, consequentialism provides the most practical explanation for morality due to the notion of providing the best possible result. Contrarily, deontology and virtue
Voluntarists and non-voluntarists have had intense debate on the issue of religion and morality. The underlying central argument of the debate is whether the morality requires a religious foundation or not. While the voluntarists claim that morality does require a religious foundation, non-voluntarists assert that it doesn’t. David Brink and George Mavrodes argues with this theme of voluntarist and non-voluntarist. My essay will largely focus on the strengths and weakness of both voluntarists and
asks “Is the pious loved by the god because it is pious, or is it pious because it is loved by the gods?”, in simpler terms, ‘Are morally good acts willed by God because they are morally good, or are they morally good because they are willed by God?’. This argument creates a huge dilemma for Divine Command theorists as their theory lies solely on the claim that morality is dependent on God’s will. However the question asked by Socrates in response to Divine command theory produces extreme difficulty
That is, there are some things that are right or good in and of themselves, conversely there are certain acts that are wrong in and of themselves. In following with the second option, i.e. that the gods love things because they are good, this forces one to admit that things are good separate from the gods; the things the gods love are pious regardless of the gods love. This means that the gods cannot cause morality in any way. Therefore, if one accepts either of the options in the Euthyphro dilemma
The long-standing debate on ethics is far from being solved; however, two philosophers have formulated their own theories in determining whether an action is good or bad. John Stuart Mill focuses on a utilitarian perspective and utilizes the idea of consequentialism and on the other hand, Immanuel Kant avoids the consequentialist argument and supports a deontological perspective in analyzing morality and ethics. Both arguments, valid as they may be, strongly contradict one another, mostly on the
view that morality is dependent upon God, and that moral obligation depends on God’s commands. Therefore, Divine Command Theory claims that morality is ultimately based on the commands or character of God, and that the morally right action is the one that God command. The specific content of these divine commands varies according to the particular religion and the particular views of the individual divine command theorist, but all versions of the theory hold in common the claim that morality and moral
two differing views on morality. Hume's philosophy regarding moral theory came from the belief that reason alone can never cause action. Desire or thoughts cause action. Because reason alone can never cause action, morality is rooted in us and our perception of the world and what we want to gain from it. Virtue arises from acting on a desire to help others. Hume's moral theory is therefore a virtue-centered morality rather than the natural-law morality, which saw morality as coming from God. Kant's