Just like a religious believer who states “god loves us” but can’t explain the contradiction of evil in the world, believers qualify their statements by explaining god’s love is not like humans love he calls this “death by a thousand qualifications”. Therefore religious language is meaningless. However religion has responded to the falsification principle. R.B Braithwaite argued that the falsification principle explains religious language as cognitive when it if in fact non cognitive and therefore cannot be falsified, religious language is therefore still meaningful. Hare also responds to the falsification principle, showing that religious statements are meaningful even though they cannot be falsified because they have a significant impact for the people using the statement.
As previously stated, in order to be a KoF, you must be willing to nullify the ethical standards you are most accustomed to in order to comply to the declaration of God or any other divine or spiritual medium. The definition of a Tragic Hero, (TH) is quite easy to understand. A TH can also be a good or bad guy, also depending on your religious stance and how you view the biblical accounts of the story of Abraham and Isaac. The TH is the person who will never defy the moral ethics of
The relationship between a theistic God (considering there is one) and morality cannot be explained in simply a few sentences. One may immediately come to the conclusion that God decides what is moral and immoral. This is known as Divine Command Theory which says that morality is dependent on God’s commands. However, this gives rise to the other side that says an action is moral because God approves of it. This is known as the Autonomy thesis which says that morality is not dependent on God’s commands.
Situation ethics works towards a successful end goal which in this case is love, this is pragmatism. The ethic is relativistic which means that there are no fixed rules when choosing what to do but whatever is done must stay relative to the Christian love of agape, making it simple and easy to make decisions accordingly. Positivism is where faith statements are made and people act in a way that is reasonable in the light of these statements. Reason isn’t the basis for faith, but it works within faith. Situation ethics depends on Christians freely choosing faith that god is love, so giving first place to Christian love.
However, if this link between religion and morality is criticised, then there are sufficient grounds for secularist and atheistic ways of life. Why is religion needed when it is not the source of moral guidance? Two famous critiques of the link between religion and morality are the Euthyphro dilemma and the many critiques od Richard Dawkins against religion. Both essentially come to the same conclusion; that we do not need God to be good. The basic concept of religion and morality, especially divine command theory, is very simple: what God commands is good, therefore only do that.
This ethical theory aligns itself with a Christian worldview, arguing that an action is good only if the principle behind the action is moral law (Giersson and Holmgren, 2000). In other words, actions should only be done in accordance with God’s will. For instance, clearly stating how outliers are addressed when drawing conclusions based on the statistical analysis is ethical in that it is the right thing to do so that the probability of misinterpretation is minimized. Additionally, Kantian ethics also require autonomy, which is often required in relationship to dealing with clients and the subjects from whom data is collected (Tittle, 2000). Again, this ties back to the Christian worldview of loving ones neighbor.
A.J. Ayer agreed with the principle of metaphysical assertions that can not be verified to the point where he states that all statements about God cannot be verified therefore rendering them meaningless. :But the notion of a person whose essential attributed are non-empirical is not an intelligible notion at all”. Therefore one may reach the conclusion that one argument against the principle of verification principle for religious belief is that is unintelligible. A.J.
Things that should guide people towards repentance could potentially keep their focus looking inside themselves. Once a person can truthfully see how sinful their thoughts and lives are, it can and will hopefully lead them to depend on God. While Crabb is relying on God for answers, Rogerian theory states that “no other human being can possibly determine what the correct or incorrect behavior is for any other individual. Because of this, Kensit says that therapists must keep this in mind and use non-directive but yet supportive therapy. (Kensit, 2000).
Where the other two Christian systems talk about conflicting morals and doing the lesser of the evils, the unqualified absolutism ethical system supports the idea that God cannot have contradicting morals and that he does not differ from one day to the next in his laws. In theory, the unqualified absolutism ethical system is where my heart is pushing me, but in practice I do not know if my judgment would follow. The Calvary Chapel Bible College has a link to this subject that describes scenarios in an unqualified absolutism ethical system. One of the scenarios describes that you should never commit one sin to prevent another, even if the latter seems far worse. For example if you were to tell a lie to prevent a murder or rape, the text describes that you should not do so because God sees all sin as equal.
He spoke about faith, where faith means believing in something unproven. If a person believes in something unsubstantiated, then it is useless to say to him: "Listen, wait, well, here are the facts". This person may say "I will not even argue, it is my faith, I will not renounce it, I will not give up". That is like the terrorists think that they are sinless, that they perform the will of the Lord, according to their point of view they are do good things. According to Richard Dawkins this is the evil of religion.