This Essay Is Only One Page, Single Spaced, The Reading Whic

This essay is only one page single spaced the reading which this essay

This essay is only one page single spaced. The reading which this essay will be on is "Are There Absolute Moral Rules?" by James Raches in Elements book. pp. . Please make sure is 1" margins on all four sides, filling the entire page. Times New Roman Font. In the paper I provided in the attachment it will be telling you what the professor wants. Basically, to write thoughts on the article. Should address or discuss anything from the readings which led to a strong reaction from you. It might be something that you loved, or hated, or understood well, or couldn't understand at all. Something with personal associations or which causes an emotional reaction. Please discuss your beliefs about why this content was easy for you, or difficult, or why it caused the reactions you experienced. If you have difficulty with some of the reading, you must discuss this difficulty and the steps you took to try to have a comprehension of the material you found difficult.

Paper For Above instruction

In exploring James Raches' article "Are There Absolute Moral Rules?" I found myself emotionally and intellectually engaged with the question of whether moral rules are universal and unchanging or context-dependent. Raches presents a nuanced discussion that challenges readers to consider the foundations of moral authority and the implications of absolutism versus relativism in ethical philosophy. This essay will reflect on my reactions to the article, the aspects I found compelling, challenging, and my personal connections to the themes discussed.

One of the most striking elements of Raches' argument was his presentation of moral absolutism — the idea that certain moral rules are universally valid, regardless of context or individual belief. I initially found myself strongly resonating with this view, perhaps because I grew up in a cultural environment where certain moral principles, such as honesty and respect, were seen as non-negotiable. These principles felt intuitive and essential to me, and I believed that absolute moral rules serve as moral anchors, providing a stable foundation for ethical conduct. Raches' defense of this stance made me introspectively affirm my own beliefs, feeling that a moral compass rooted in absolutes offers clarity in complex situations.

However, as I delved deeper into the article, I encountered arguments that challenged my initial assumptions, especially when Raches addressed the potential rigidity of moral absolutism. I experienced a sense of discomfort, as I recognized situations where adhering strictly to absolute rules might lead to morally problematic outcomes. For example, the dilemma of telling the truth in a situation where it could cause harm made me question whether moral absolutes could accommodate such complexities. This discomfort prompted me to reflect on the importance of context in moral judgments and led to a more nuanced understanding that rigid absolutism might overlook the moral nuances of real-world situations.

My emotional reaction to these ideas was mixed. On one hand, I appreciated the clarity and stability that moral absolutes could provide, especially during times of moral uncertainty. On the other hand, I felt uneasy about the potential for inflexibility and the risk of moral dogmatism. This internal conflict created a tension between my desire for universal moral principles and my recognition of the complexities and ambiguities that often characterize moral decision-making. The article pushed me to consider the possibility that maybe a hybrid approach, incorporating both absolute principles and contextual sensitivity, could better serve ethical reasoning.

Reading Raches initially seemed straightforward, as I quickly aligned with the appeal of moral absolutes based on my upbringing and personal experiences. However, I found some sections difficult to fully grasp, particularly the philosophical nuances of how absolutism can be defended against relativist critiques. To better understand these challenging parts, I reread relevant sections and consulted supplementary resources on moral philosophy, including works by Kant and consequentialists. These steps improved my comprehension, allowing me to appreciate the depth of the philosophical debate beyond my initial intuitive responses.

In conclusion, my engagement with Raches' article was both intellectually stimulating and emotionally complex. It reinforced my existing beliefs about the importance of universal moral principles while also compelling me to reconsider the potential limitations of strict absolutism. The process of grappling with difficult concepts and reflecting on my reactions has deepened my appreciation for the complexity of moral philosophy. This exploration has underscored that ethical decision-making often requires balancing principles with the realities of human situations, a concept that resonates profoundly with my personal and moral understanding.

References

• Raches, J. (Year). Are There Absolute Moral Rules? In Elements. pp.
• Kant, I. (1785). Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals.
• Mill, J. S. (1863). Utilitarianism.
• Williams, B. (1973). Morality: An Introduction to Ethics.
• Shafer-Landau, R. (2012). The Fundamentals of Ethics. Oxford University Press.
• Hare, R. (1981). Moral Thinking. Oxford University Press.
• Ross, W. D. (1930). The Right and the Good.
• Singer, P. (2011). Practical Ethics. Cambridge University Press.
• MacIntyre, A. (1981). After Virtue. University of Notre Dame Press.
• Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle. (trans. 2009). Basic Books.