On one hand, the Enlightenment views saw God as a far away figure that did not interfere with the lives of humans. The Enlightenment was a period of intellectual growth that tried to explain the true nature of mankind and how it progresses. One of the most important theorists for The Enlightenment was John Locke. John Locke created a theory called tabula theory, which had important assumptions about human nature and undermined Christian assertion that humankind was inherently sinful. Another person who also criticized some of the religious views was Pierre Bayle.
Many people believe that morality is dependent is religion and morality is based on the religious scholars and holy books. There is no point in morality of God hadn’t set the moral values in the first place. However, some also say that humans only behave morally because they’re scared of God and any punishment to follow. There are several approaches that are taken when attempting to work out the relationship between religion and morality. ‘Is what is pious loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is loved?’ In Plato’s Euthyphro dilemma, Plato is asking ‘is x good because God loves it or does God love x because x is good?’ An example of this is murder; is murder wrong because God says it is or is murder wrong because it is wrong morally?
Mill believed it was extremely important that an indivduals free will should not be crushed by society. Mill believed indivduality is what it is to be human and anything that takes away your indivuduality is wrong. Mill state in his book On Liberty “Whatever crushes indivduality is despotism.” Despostism is the idea of dictatorship so Mill is saying that anything that stops our indivduality for example religion is controlling us and not allowing us to be free, which is wrong. Althought we are free we must consider others, this means that we can use our freedom however we must make sure we are not spoiling the freedom of others. This is supported by Paul Kurtz who states humans have the right “to satisfy their tastes” but however they shold not “impose their values on others.” For example you may want to murder someone with your free will however if you go ahead and commit the crime you are negatively effecting others in society and this is wrong.
Later in his life Franklin’s deist views remain the same, however, possibly influenced by his Puritan upbringing and the Puritan culture surrounding him, he seeks moral perfection that is commendable by Puritan standards. The very fact that Franklin was able to develop and publish such radical ideas that were completely different from and contradicted the accepted views of his society is proof of the progress made for the rights to think freely during this time of Enlightenment. At the early age of 19 Franklin published a pamphlet in which he revealed his idea of human nature as not in need of constant improvement and punishment because humans are not naturally good or evil. Humans are simply human, nothing else. Franklin does not believe human beings could possibly be evil because he does not believe evil could exist with an all powerful, good, and wise God.
The Rationalists were a group of people who believed that the world and everyone on it was basically good unlike the puritans who believed the total opposite. They also believed that people can discover the truth using there on reason instead of relying on only religious faith of intuition. Rationalists thought it improbable that God would choose to reveal himself only at particular times to particular people. It seemed much more sensible to
“Expressions of secular humanism reject both the minimal Christian elements of its precursors and essential biblical truths, such as the fact that human beings bear the image of their Creator.” (Text Book The popular Encyclopedia of Apologetics) Meaning/ Purpose: Secular humanists never think about God don’t pray, never worry about what God thinks. So they may devote much more time and attention, and their energy to improving themselves, their relationships, and their environment. Morality: “Secular humanists base their morality and ideas about justice on critical intellect unassisted by Scripture, which Christians rely on for knowledge concerning right and wrong, good and evil.” (secularhumanism.org) Destiny: Secular humanists know that the truth of human experience is that certain virtues, practices, and habits of mind and character make for a better life. “It aims to heal this world and glorify man as the author of his own, progressive salvation.”(secularhumanism.org) Contrast: I was not sure if I would like to do this paper since I do not agree with the beliefs of secular humanism. Before I could consider my Christian response to secular humanism, I had to do my research.
Even in contemporary society, we tend to associate morality with some kind of divine will, but through the Euthyphro, Socrates seems to suggesting we think along another line altogether. Is something moral because God commands it? Does morality depend on religious belief? A common view among religious, and even some secular, philosophers is that just as conventional laws require lawmakers, morals also require some ultimate source. The Divine Command Theory is the view that moral actions are those that conform to God's will.
How does Shakespeare’s portrayal of King Richard III highlight the greed of absolute power and the role of language in manipulation? The portrayal of King Richard by William Shakespeare accentuates the greed of absolute power and the role of language in manipulation. Mindful of his purpose, audience and contemporary context, Shakespeare employs a number of textural features/techniques and incorporates them within the text. This piece certainly displays Shakespeare’s intentions to win the favour of Queen Elizabeth, as well as his ambition to draw the attention of his audience to the concept of karma. The image Shakespeare has created for King Richard through his play, explores the greed of supreme power, specifically that of the Yorks.
By his own admission, Fallon credits positive parental involvement for shaping his character therefore inhibiting further development of the “unconscious forces” of heredity from manifesting. The debate on free will and moral responsibility is one that seems to have no singular answer. Research by neuroscientists like James Fallon may finally render a definitive answer to this question or further fuel the flame. John Stuart Mill’s On Liberty discusses the limits of governmental interference in the lives of individuals. Mill wrote what is known as the Harm Principle: “the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others” (Mill, pg
It is both a relief and an educator. The Alcott and other transcendentalists were not unreceptive or opposed to the modernization of the world. However, they were concerned that too much modernization could result in alienation. Nature offered a way to keep people in touch with their souls and spiritual fundamentals. Puritans saw nature as God's gift to man who conquered the "unlimited"