2. Examples: a) ”the notion of duty” A good will is a will that is for duty and what you do is only moral if it is done for duty. Doing something with duty being your only reason to act is morally right, and it does not have to be enjoyable only morally right. b) ”I would express thus, Duty is the necessity of acting from respect for the law. I may have an inclination for an object as the effect of my proposed action, but I cannot have respect for it, just for this reason, that it is an effect and not an energy of will.
God faring people accept the teachings of God and the best way to live. Euthyphro dilemma was “Is conduct right because the gods command it, or do the gods command it because it is right” (Rachel’s and 50-53)? The problem with this dilemma is that God is always right and what isn’t right is wrong according to God. Which makes Euthyphro confused because he isn’t sure anymore what is right and what is wrong. The concept of morality is mysterious is saying that just because god says its right to slap a child doesn’t really make it right.
If God breaks this, then he is not being omnibenevolent (all good), which is another of his attributes. However lust is far from morally right, so God cannot experience it. Leading on from that, since God is confined to being morally perfect, he has no choice whether he is or not, he can’t be omnipotent. Another aspect of this argument is can God fear? We are either scared of the unknown (e.g death) or something more powerful than ourselves (e.g lions).
Explain the theory of duty in Kantian Ethics (25 marks) Kantian ethics is an absolutist theory as Kant claimed what is morally ‘good’ is constant and unchanging. Because of this, it can be a universal concept applied in different societies and cultures with the idea that an action should only be performed for duty’s sake. His approach was deontological because the idea of right or wrong was based on the action rather than the consequence, he believed that this was the only rational basis for morality and could be proven objectively, independent from emotion and opinion. As humans we have the innate ability to reason, something which we gained prior to any sensory experience in this world. This is an idea which is absolute and according to Kant, the way we decide the morality of an action.
For example, in the case of lying, a deontologist would argue that lying is always wrong, doesn’t matter even if it holds any potential to creating a greater good. While the consequentialist would say that to lie is a wrong thing to do because it would cause negative outcomes as a result, however lying could still be allowed, knowing that it would lead to the creation of a greater good. While as for a virtue-ethicist would care less on just about lying, but focus more on what does the decision say about his/her own traits and character. So here are several features that make the theory of virtue ethics distinctive compared to the other
However, moral saint does not and cannot hold them. Moral saint is forced to be as good as he can – he always tries to look for the best in people or to improve regrettable situations as long as it seems possible. He has standard moral virtues (such as patience, kindliness, justice, consideration, charity, hospitability) to a non-standard degree and as a result he will be dull and humourless person. What is more, moral saint will never be able to enjoy anything more
In order to be morally perfect both good and evil must exist outside of God so that he can choose it. The only way for a being to be morally perfect is for an evil to exist that is not chosen. If God destroys all evil, moral perfection becomes impossible because the choice not to do evil will no longer exist. If God is omnipotent, omniscient , and morally perfect he is constrained not to destroy all evil by his own definition of existence. The property or constraint of being morally perfect is as important as omnipotence.
Explain what is meant by moral absolutism Moral absolutism also known as moral objectivism is the belief that there are fixed universal laws which are true irrespective of time, place and situation. This belief is that an action can be intrinsically right or wrong in itself, and this is not dependent on outcome, culture or time. Moral absolutism is a priori and objective; based on facts and logic, and on the most part deontological. It is always right or wrong. It is important to note that although all moral absolutists agree that there are fundamental ethical laws they disagree on the origin or authority of these laws.
If God is all knowing and all powerful and all good, therefore god would not want us to suffer and not put evil on earth. I believe that evil and suffering does exist because of the simple fact that we wouldn’t know the difference between good and bad, sad and happiness, love and hate. We wouldn’t know to appreciate god and everything he does for us. God being an all tri-omni god would not put anything on earth that he knew we couldn’t handle. There are two varieties of evil, moral and natural evil.
Also, Kant sustain that reason is the most important concept to identify what is ethical in a moral universal law, and that nothing have to be done because of self interest, utility, inclination, feeling or pity. Based on the previous information, a Kantian perspective does not allow cheating in a final exam because it is considered an immoral act. Cheating could not be a motive nor could it be accommodated as a universal law, because it will indicate that cheating has moral value, resulting in an irrelevant action of making a test to educate our society. From another point of view, an ethical egoist has a completely different perspective of cheating on an exam compared to a Kantian perspective. Ethical egoism has its fundamental on the justified actions that benefit only the interest of a person, or self interest.