Morality is a Human Invention
To approach the subject of Morality, one must first gird himself well, for the road is a difficult one. The perennial questions often revolve around what is Right and what is Wrong, so an explanation here is difficult at best, and futile, at worst.
Nevertheless, I shall begin with a quote from Twilight of the Idols, by Nietzsche:
"I formulate a principle. All naturalism in morality, that is all healthy morality, is dominated by an instinct of life- some commandment of life is fulfilled through a certain canon of 'shall' and 'shall not', some hindrance and hostile element on life's road is thereby removed. Anti-natural morality, that is virtually every morality that has hitherto been
…show more content…
When it comes to the "chosen" men who provide moral interpretations, I am hesitant to put my faith into a corruptible, inherently selfish man. The proponents of any morality seem to always claim a connection to the Almighty God, who created the world, but I have never had these rules communicated to me by God. Should I trust a body of men, (i.e. the religious body,) which has always and without fail been highly contemptible, selfish, power-hungry? Should I live according to the dictates of such men as the Medieval popes, who possessed harems, murdered competitive clergy members, raped nuns, slaughtered Jews? Should I trust morality as preached by Jim Jones, David Koresh, Torquemada?
I think not.
I also do not rely on the intuitive "proof" of morality, which rests on internal, emotional, and therefore unreliable and spurious, reasoning. The claim that you feel God within is ridiculous. You simply feel good, or understood, or peaceful. But we, as the egotistical, fearful humans we are, have the audacity to state that God resides within our hearts, when what they mistakenly call God is simply an unset stomach, or ejaculation.
Furthermore, the claim that God set his immortal laws upon the hearts of Man begs the question,
People from all walks of life face many ethical dilemmas. These dilemmas have consequences. Our worldview determines how we deal with these dilemmas, and guides us to the right decisions. In this essay, I will examine an ethical issues through my Christian worldview. I will also present other viewpoints, and compare them to mine.
What is morality? Where does our sense of morality come from and why is it important for us to know? The cognitive scientist, psychologist, linguist, and scholar, Steven Pinker discusses this in his essay, “The Moral Instinct”. In this essay, Pinker claims that our morality sense is innate, it constantly changes, and it is universal among each culture. Pinker also explains that moral sense shapes our judgement as it is something that we value and seek in other people. The science of the moral sense is important since it shows how morality impacts our actions and it explains why we act in certain ways.
HP Owen and Cardinal Newman put forward another moral argument, morality as derived from God (via conscience and objective laws or rules). For
But surely we can know, for example, that cruelty is wrong independently of any reference to what God has revealed. Also, the person whose moral life consists in blindly following what he or she takes to be moral rules revealed by God is morally immature, just as the child who sticks rigidly to the rules of a game without ever asking what those rules are for is immature.
These individuals are known to be experts of morality. The chapter proposes two reasons as to why these individuals are called upon so frequently. One, for those who believe and have some sort of religious back round, and second, for those who believe in what is called a “scientific view” of the world. This chapter presents the idea that there is some popular belief that religion and morality go hand in hand and that in order to understand morality, you must understand religion. It is explained that when we view morality from a religious perspective, we give meaning to morality in a way that a “good man” made this world that we currently live in and that we are his children. While the book proposes the question that people who believe in God, or a higher power, base their values on what those religions state is right or wrong, whereas for an atheist the question still remains; how do these individuals weigh their moral compass and place their values?
The belief that morality requires God remains a widely held moral maxim. In particular, it serves as the basic assumption of the Christian fundamentalist's social theory. Fundamentalists claim that all of society's troubles - everything from AIDS to out-of-wedlock pregnancies - are the result of a breakdown in morality and that this breakdown is due to a decline in the belief of God. This paper will look at different examples of how a god could be a bad thing and show that humans can create rules and morals all on their own. It will also touch upon the fact that doing good for the wrong reasons can also be a bad thing for the person.
As mentioned before, some cultures of men were said by Paul to show that men have an inherent instinct for what is in the Law of God. Paul stated that when such cultures do by instinct what is contained in the Law, they are a law unto themselves without having the written Law. They show that the Law is written in their hearts and consciences. This phenomenon reinforces Paul’s stance that mankind is without excuse because the nature of God is clearly understood by looking at His creation (Romans 2).
When thinking about morality, it is necessary to consider how aspects from both nature and nurture, along with free will, may form ones moral beliefs and dictate ones moral actions. To understand how moral beliefs as well as actions formulate and operate within individuals and societies, it is imperative that a general definition of morality is laid out. Morality, then, can be defined as ones principles regarding what is right and wrong, good or bad. Although an individual may hold moral beliefs, it is not always the case that moral actions follow. Therefore, in this essay I aim to provide an explanation that clarifies the two and in doing so I also hope to further the notion that one’s moral framework is a product of all three factors; nature, nurture, and free will. The first part of this essay will flush out what exactly morality it and how it manifests similarly across individuals and differently across individuals. Contrariwise, I will then explain how morality manifests similarly across societies and differently across societies. Alongside presenting the information in this order, I will trace morality back to primordial times to showcase how morality has evolved and developed since then, not only from a nature-based standpoint, but also from a
is sound to reason that piety and moral goodness are implicit in anything God commands.
Morality leaves open the potential to play God, to raise ourselves to the level of sovereignty. In the movie Rudy, the title character asks Father Cavanaugh if there is anything more he can do with his relationship with Christ which will lead to admittance into Notre Dame. The priest wisely answers, "Son, in thirty-five years of religious study, I’ve come up with only two hard, incontrovertible facts; there is a God, and, I’m not Him" (Worner, 2015). In transhumanism, like everything, Father Cavanaugh's words bear upon the situation. Man's wisdom is no match for that of the Lord. "For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men" (1 Cor 1:25, ESV). When weighing the various aspects of transhumanism, we must never forget there is a God, and we are not
Morality is defined as a system or code that we humans use to differentiate between right and wrong. This system could be derived from a number of factors: religion, culture, and upbringing. It is difficult enough to determine what an individual's morals are, but going further to determine how we came to possess those morals is even more ambitious. Still, regardless of its difficulty, this subject consumes many philosophers and psychologists. One such moral psychologists, Jonathan Haidt, is theorizing the possibility of evolution causing ones morality. Haidt is a moral psychologist at the Universtiy of Virgina further believes that complex social structures such as religion and politics as well as our need for social structures affect
Friedrich Nietzsche’s “On the Genealogy of Morality” includes his theory on man’s development of “bad conscience.” Nietzsche believes that when transitioning from a free-roaming individual to a member of a community, man had to suppress his “will to power,” his natural “instinct of freedom”(59). The governing community threatened its members with punishment for violation of its laws, its “morality of customs,” thereby creating a uniform and predictable man (36). With fear of punishment curtailing his behavior, man was no longer allowed the freedom to indulge his every instinct. He turned his aggressive focus inward, became ashamed of his natural animal instincts, judged himself as inherently evil, and developed a bad conscience (46).
How exactly can we know God’s will? In divine command theory, God’s will is the only thing that determines morality. Theists will first point to the religious scriptures...but which one? A Christian might think it is obviously the Bible, but an objective viewer will have to choose between the Bible, Quran, Vedas etc. You can not say look at which one has the better moral arguments, since you’re trying to derive morality from the book! Another common source for morality is through people who have spoke to God. But many people claim this, so how do we know who is right? Someone might say that God told him to destroy a village; does this mean he is right? The final option is that God gave us reason and knowledge, and so morality is instilled in our very nature. But then, what is the point of believing in certain religions if people are going to act the same anyway? And people don’t act the same, so does that mean God is responsible for
Throughout history morality has been a topic of intense debate. Innumerable thinkers have devoted immense amounts of time and energy to the formulation of various ethical theories intended to assist humans in their daily lives. These theories set out guidelines which help to determine the rightness or wrongness of any given action and can therefore illuminate which choice would be morally beneficial. And while many of these theories differ substantially, most have at least one common underlying principle, namely that humans deserve to be treated with a certain level of respect. This idea comes from the belief that all humans have interests which are significant enough to be considered, hence no one should impede another
In the article Unspeakable Ethics, Unnatural Laws, Arthur A. Leff took an agnostic approach when determining what morality should be comprised of. He suggested that humans struggle with desiring to follow a predetermined and unchallengeable set of moral rules, while at the same time wanting the autonomy to create those rules.