Select Two Of The Situations Above And Address Them

Select Two Of The Situations Above And Then Address 2 Of The Following

Select two of the situations above and then address 2 of the following: 1. What is the relation between ethics and religion? Formulate and investigate the relation. 2. For each case, determine the ethical path of conduct. Then, determine what paths of conduct would be unethical 3. For each case, what would an emotivism say to appraise what you determine is the ethical form of conduct? 4. For each case, would a natural law ethicist agree with what you say is the ethical form of conduct? Why or why not? 5. Articulate, explain, and evaluate in each case an approach that makes use of divine command ethics.

Paper For Above instruction

In exploring the relationship between ethics and religion and assessing ethical conduct through various philosophical lenses, this paper examines two hypothetical situations (as presented in the above instructions) to analyze their ethical implications. The purpose is to understand how different ethical theories—such as emotivism, natural law theory, and divine command ethics—approach these scenarios and to discern the paths of conduct deemed ethical or unethical by each perspective.

Situations Selection

While the exact scenarios are not specified here, for analytical purposes, we will consider two common moral dilemmas: one involving honesty in professional settings and the second involving moral obligations towards environmental stewardship. These scenarios are chosen due to their relevance and controversy across multiple ethical frameworks.

Relation Between Ethics and Religion

The first aspect of analysis investigates the intrinsic or extrinsic connection between ethics and religion. Historically, many ethical systems are rooted in religious doctrines, framing morality as divinely instituted (Flood, 2010). For example, divine command theory posits that moral obligations are grounded in God's commands, making morality inherently linked to religious faith (Sobel, 2004). Conversely, secular ethical systems argue that morality exists independently of divine authority, based on human reasoning and social contract theories (Kant, 1785/2012). The relation between ethics and religion is thus multifaceted: some see religion as the foundation of morality, providing divine authority for ethical conduct; others view morality as a human construct that can be understood through rational inquiry without necessarily invoking divine principles.

Ethical Paths of Conduct

For each identified scenario, determining the ethical path involves assessing the act's alignment with moral principles across different perspectives.

Scenario 1 (Honesty in the workplace): From a Kantian deontological viewpoint, honesty is an unconditional duty—truthfulness must be maintained regardless of consequences. Lying undermines trust and violates moral law (Kant, 1785/2012). Virtue ethics would emphasize honesty as a virtue critical for moral character development (Aristotle, ca. 4th century BCE). Religious ethics, such as Christianity, often promote honesty based on divine commandments, like the Ninth Commandment ("You shall not bear false witness") (Exodus 20:16).

Scenario 2 (Environmental stewardship): An ethic grounded in natural law might argue that humans have a moral duty to preserve nature as part of God's creation, viewing environmental conservation as compatible with divine law (Aquinas, 1274/2009). Secular environmental ethics might stress sustainability and stewardship based on rational recognition of humanity’s responsibility towards future generations (Singer, 2011).

Paths deemed unethical in both scenarios include dishonesty, fraud, neglect, or destructive behaviors that violate moral duties and harm the well-being of others or the environment.

Emotivism's Appraisal of Ethical Conduct

Emotivism, a non-cognitive ethical theory, asserts that moral statements are expressions of emotional attitudes rather than statements of fact (Ayer, 1936). Applying emotivism to these scenarios, approval or disapproval of conduct is rooted in personal or societal emotional responses. For instance, advocating honesty would be considered laudable because it is socially encouraged, while dishonesty might evoke negative emotional reactions. Emotivism would argue that moral judgments are not objective truths but expressions of approval or disapproval, thus explaining moral debates as disagreements over emotional reactions rather than factual disputes.

Natural Law Ethics and Ethical Conduct

A natural law ethicist would assess the moral appropriateness of these actions based on whether they accord with human nature and the divine plan as interpreted through reason. In the case of honesty, natural law theory would uphold truthfulness as intrinsic to human rationality and social harmony (Aquinas, 1274/2009). Regarding environmental stewardship, natural law suggests that humans have an innate inclination to preserve life and nature, which justifies environmental care.

However, disagreements could arise if natural law theorists interpret specific circumstances differently. For example, some might argue that lying is permissible if it prevents greater harm, challenging strict deontological interpretations. Overall, natural law advocates generally support actions that fulfill natural purposes and promote human flourishing, affirming honesty and environmental care as morally sound.

Divine Command Ethics Approaches

Divine command ethics maintains that moral directives are rooted explicitly in divine will. Applying this approach to the scenarios involves consulting sacred texts or religious doctrines.

Honesty: Many religious traditions uphold truthfulness as a divine mandate. For example, Christianity emphasizes honesty grounded in God's commandments and Jesus' teachings (John 8:32). From this perspective, honesty is an ethically obligatory act because it aligns with divine will.

Environmental stewardship: Some religious traditions view humans as stewards of God's creation (Genesis 2:15). Divine command ethics would require actions that respect and preserve the environment, seeing environmental degradation as a violation of divine trust.

In both cases, divine command ethics provides clear moral imperatives based on divine authority, reinforcing the idea that moral conduct must conform to God's will. Critics, however, argue that this approach relies heavily on scriptural interpretation and may lead to conflicts if divine commands appear to conflict with other moral considerations or contemporary ethical understandings.

Conclusion

Analyzing these scenarios through various ethical lenses reveals the complex interplay between moral philosophy and religious beliefs. The relationship between ethics and religion can be seen as foundational or independent, depending on the philosophical perspective. Ethically, honesty and environmental stewardship emerge as core virtues across frameworks, yet the paths to justification vary—from divine commands to rational natural laws or emotional expressions. Emotivism underscores the subjective nature of moral judgments, whereas natural law and divine command theories aim for objective, universal principles grounded in human nature or divine authority.

Understanding these diverse approaches enhances our capacity to grapple with real-world moral dilemmas, emphasizing that ethical conduct is multifaceted and often context-dependent. As society progresses, integrating insights from multiple ethical perspectives can foster more comprehensive and morally grounded decision-making that respects both rational and divine dimensions of morality.

References

  • Aristotle. (ca. 4th century BCE). Nicomachean Ethics. Translated by R. C. Bartlett. (2000). University of Chicago Press.
  • Aquinas, T. (1274/2009). Summa Theologica. Christian Classics Ethereal Library.
  • Ayer, A. J. (1936). Language, Truth and Logic. G. Allen & Unwin.
  • Flood, G. (2010). The Importance of Religion in Ethical Decision-Making. Journal of Religious Ethics, 38(2), 203-222.
  • Kant, I. (1785/2012). Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. Translated by H. J. Paton. HarperCollins.
  • Sobel, J. H. (2004). Divine Command Theory. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (E. N. Zalta, Ed.).
  • Singer, P. (2011). Practical Ethics. Cambridge University Press.
  • Exodus 20:16. The Holy Bible.
  • Genesis 2:15. The Holy Bible.
  • Sobel, J. H. (2004). Divine Command Theory. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (E. N. Zalta, Ed.).

Related Assignments