Fundamentals of Ethics...

[Great Fiction]

I find morality to be more personal than ethics

Its an easy assessment until ethics provide the premise for the law where the few control the many, then shall ethics be just as personal.

When should normative ethics be applied personally to organize one's own moral framework?

When should normative ethics be applied upon the whole of society to organize all?

 

[brightlights]

Rules, character, outcome. (Deontological ethics, virtue ethics, utilitarianism).

On which of these approaches should we base our thinking about morality? Or, is it possible to unite the three into some coherent, consistent, comprehensive system?

Best wishes, Strivax.

It's not only possible. It's necessary. None of the three can stand without the others. All are needed. Only Christianity can unite the three because the three are united in God. God's law provides our norms, the world he created functions best when people obey his law, and we discover who we truly are as we obey his law.

 

[Davian]

It's not only possible. It's necessary. None of the three can stand without the others. All are needed. Only Christianity can unite the three because the three are united in God. God's law provides our norms, the world he created functions best when people obey his law, and we discover who we truly are as we obey his law.

Might makes right?

 

[brightlights]

Might makes right?

It depends on what you mean. Usually when we say "might doesn't make right" we mean that just because someone has the power to make and enforce laws doesn't mean that their laws are just. Just because a king demands that his subjects worship him and he has the power to enforce this demand doesn't mean that the demand determines morality. We usually appeal to some higher court to demonstrate this. Something like rationality or some moral system that is higher than the king tells us that his demands are unethical.

In God's case, though, there is nothing higher that we can appeal to. His word is law because he is the creator of everything. What would you appeal to to challenge his word? Rationality? He created it! Moral intuition? He created that too! Science? He created the natural world that we study! All things come from him and so morality itself is rooted in the person of God.

 

[Eudaimonist]

In God's case, though, there is nothing higher that we can appeal to. His word is law because he is the creator of everything. What would you appeal to to challenge his word?

Dude, God is just a human dream. A supremely egotistical dream.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Davian]

It depends on what you mean. Usually when we say "might doesn't make right" we mean that just because someone has the power to make and enforce laws doesn't mean that their laws are just. Just because a king demands that his subjects worship him and he has the power to enforce this demand doesn't mean that the demand determines morality. We usually appeal to some higher court to demonstrate this. Something like rationality or some moral system that is higher than the king tells us that his demands are unethical.

In God's case, though, there is nothing higher that we can appeal to.

Sure we can. We can appeal to reason, compassion, empathy, and human well-being. I do not see why gods should be except from these standards.

His word is law because he is the creator of everything.

This premise is not substantiated.

What would you appeal to to challenge his word? Rationality? He created it!

This premise is not substantiated.

Moral intuition? He created that too!

This premise is not substantiated.

Science? He created the natural world that we study! All things come from him and so morality itself is rooted in the person of God.

Keep going. We have flush toilets. He created it! All things come from him and so plumbing systems are rooted in the person of God.

Assuming that gods are possible for the moment, what act is not forgivable under this God-based morality of yours?