Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Proponents of theism argue that without a God or gods it is impossible to justify moral behavior on metaphysical grounds and thus to make a coherent case for abiding by moral standards. C. S. Lewis makes such an argument in Mere Christianity.
Roughly, it is the view that there are no moral standards other than God's will: without God's commands, nothing would be right or wrong. This view was partially defended by Duns Scotus , who argued that not all Ten Commandments belong to the Natural Law in the strictest sense. [ 44 ]
But they erroneously believe that God is the only possible source of such standards. Philosophers as diverse as Plato, Immanuel Kant, John Stuart Mill, George Edward Moore, and John Rawls have demonstrated that it is possible to have a universal morality without God. Contrary to what the fundamentalists would have us believe, then, what our ...
The intersections of morality and religion involve the relationship between religious views and morals.It is common for religions to have value frameworks regarding personal behavior meant to guide adherents in determining between right and wrong.
Mar. 23—Jesus told the Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard in Matthew 20:1-16 to show that people who obey God after many years of disobedience will receive the same reward as those who have ...
For morality to be binding, God must exist. [4] In its most general form, the argument from moral normativity is: A human experience of morality is observed. God is the best or only explanation for this moral experience. Therefore, God exists. [4] [failed verification]
Conway Hall, home of the Conway Hall Ethical Society, is the oldest freethought community in the world (established 1793).. Irreligious organizations promote the view that moral standards should be based solely on naturalistic considerations, without reference to supernatural concepts (such as God or an afterlife), any desire to do good for a reward after death, or any fear of punishment for ...
Moral injury is a relatively new concept that seems to describe what many feel: a sense that their fundamental understanding of right and wrong has been violated, and the grief, numbness or guilt that often ensues. Here, you will meet combat veterans struggling with the moral and ethical ambiguities of war.