Critically assess the claim that conscience is the voice of reason (35) There are a number of views on whether conscience is the voice of reason and where this voice comes from; is it from God, do we acquire it or is it innate. Aquinas thought conscience was the natural ability of people to understand the difference between right and wrong. He believed that all people aim for what is good and try to avoid the bad (synderesis rule). Aquinas argued that although people should always follow their conscience he understood that people make wrong choices. He defined conscience in this way as “the mind of man making moral judgements” and defined it as having two parts- synderesis and conscientia (decision leading to a particular action).
This may also be a problem for Christian thinkers as, if the conscience is not the voice of God it gives moral authority to something outside of God. The existence of a conscience outside of God also strongly contradicts God’s omnipotence, although a Christian thinker may argue against this criticism with the idea that God’s omnipotence may have created a moral guide within ourselves which is no longer ‘God’s voice’ but leads us into making moral decisions. An argument may also be had about the existence of a ‘conscience’, however for the purpose of this essay, the conscience exists as a moral guide. Several philosophers have discussed conscience at great length, including; Newman, Butler and Aquinas. These men all have very different views about the origin of the conscience, however they also have some prominent similarities, for example Newman’s illative sense and Aquinas’ ideas on Synderesis, Conscientia and Phronesis.
Religious language discusses religious and spiritual concepts. It is cognitive and conveys knowledge of what is really there. Religious language offers a correspondence theory of truth if it is thought of as being able to point to the reality that it is trying to convey. It is the language of worship – it is performative and prescriptive. Some philosophers such as Aquinas believe that it is possible to talk meaningfully, truthfully and factually about God whereas others like Ayer believe this to be impossible.
St. Thomas Aquinas’ Search for the Truth of the Divine Being St. Thomas Aquinas asserts that man, as an intellectual agent, seeks to know the truth. The truth Aquinas is referring to is, for man to know the first truth, namely God. But it is known that man is not fully satisfied and continues to seek understanding of this first truth, and the existence of God. St. Thomas was no different, he maintained his faith in God but pursued philosophical investigations to seek a deeper understanding of the Divine Being. He believes reason and faith are the two paths to access the truths of God’s existence.
On one hand you have the philosophers who believe you can speak and write about God, because God is reality. On the other hand, are the Logical Positivists who claim that statements about God have no meaning because they don’t relate to anything that is real. There are a number of philosophers who claimed to have proven conclusively that religious language is meaningful, for example Aquinas’ theory of analogy. An analogy is an attempt to explain the meaning of something which is difficult to understand and forming relations through attributes or relations that are similar. Aquinas rejected univocal and equivocal language when talking about God.
The divine commands vary in religions but in the end, they all have in common that moral obligations depend on God. Natural law is sometimes described as being deontological because it leads to a set of rules that people have a duty to follow. It is an absolute theory of ethics and was developed by Thomas Aquinas. Aquinas says that the natural laws are universal and unchangeable and should be
There are situations in which God would have to compromise in terms of his attributes in order to be all-knowing. The first difficulty is that there are some things that are impossible for God to do. For example, Can God know lust? As we know, God is, and has to be morally perfect and morally right. If God breaks this, then he is not being omnibenevolent (all good), which is another of his attributes.
‘The moral argument for God is not convincing.' Discuss. (10 marks) Kant’s moral argument attempted to answer questions surrounding the idea of “right and wrong” and whether we got these ideas from a God and subsequently whether our morality depends on God. Thus his argument obtains a stronger focus on morality and duty as he felt it was not in human knowledge to prove God’s existence which is arguably why part that proves God is not necessarily as convincing and Kant merely states that we should postulate the idea of God as to explain morality it is necessary to believe that God exists. Kant believed that everybody had an innate moral awareness, “two things fill my mind with ever new and increasing admiration and awe... the starry heavens above me and the moral law within me”.
James speaks against these in his teaching. He exhorts them to remain true to the teachings and practices of the faith. James’ teachings are often compared to Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount, which would be logical due to him being brought up in the same environment as Jesus. The book of James is a protest against hypocrisy. Some have criticized James in that they thought he was teaching that salvation was by works alone, but in reality he is complementing Paul’s teaching of salvation by faith.
However it ma not always be best o use our conscience as our moral guide. As if we do use our conscience, the how can people be committed for crimes, as they believed it was right Butler was a christian theologian and philosopher who believed that the conscience was a God given ability to reason. Due to the fact that they were both christians St Paul and Butler agreed on many of their ideas. Butler thought that the conscience should be seen as a judge within everybody, a judge that makes moral decisions for us, he suggests that as it is within all of us and appears to have a higher authority we therefore must listen to it, and take on board the decision in which our conscience makes. One of the main weaknesses is the idea that not everyone can have the