"Which philosophy do you follow?" Test.

Abbadon said:

You scored as Existentialism.

Your life is guided by the concept of Existentialism: You choose the meaning and purpose of your life.
“Man is condemned to be free; because once thrown into the world, he is responsible for everything he does.”
“It is up to you to give [life] a meaning.”
--Jean-Paul Sartre
“It is man's natural sickness to believe that he possesses the Truth.”
--Blaise Pascal

Existentialism 85%
Hedonism 80%
Utilitarianism 65%
Strong Egoism 65%
Divine Command 60%
Justice (Fairness) 55%
Kantianism 55%
Nihilism 40%
Apathy 35%

Click to expand...

Flynmonkie said:

You scored as Existentialism
Your life is guided by the concept of Existentialism: You choose the meaning and purpose of your life.

“Man is condemned to be free; because once thrown into the world, he is responsible for everything he does.”
“It is up to you to give [life] a meaning.”
--Jean-Paul Sartre

“It is man's natural sickness to believe that he possesses the Truth.”
--Blaise Pascal


Existentialism 100%
Hedonism 100%
Utilitarianism 85%
Justice (Fairness)55%
Kantianism 50%
Strong Egoism 30%
Divine Command 0%
Apathy 0%
Nihilism 0%

More info at Arocoun's Wikipedia User Page...

Click to expand...

BigChrisfilm said:

I don't know about that 0% Divine Command buisness, lol.

Click to expand...

Divine Command Theory
The name “divine command theory” can be used to refer to any one of a family of related ethical theories. What these theories have in common is that they take God’s will to be the foundation of ethics. According to divine command theory, things are morally good or bad, or morally obligatory, permissible, or prohibited, solely because of God’s will or commands.

Divine command theory is often thought to be refuted by an argument known as the Euthyphro dilemma. This argument is named after Plato’s Euthyphro, the dialogue in which it has its origin (though the argument isn’t actually stated there). The Euthyphro dilemma begins by posing a question: Are morally good acts willed by God because they are morally good, or are they morally good because they are willed by God? Whichever way the theist answers this question, problems are thought to follow.

If the theist gives the first answer to the Euthyphro dilemma, holding that morally good acts are willed by God because they are morally good, then he faces the independence problem; if morally good acts are willed by God because they are morally good, then they must be morally good prior to and so independently of God’s willing them. This is clearly inconsistent with divine command theory; the divine command theorist must give the second answer to the Euthyphro dilemma.

If the theist gives the second answer to the Euthyphro dilemma, holding that morally good acts are morally good because they are willed by God, then he faces the arbitrariness problem, the emptiness problem, and the problem of abhorrent commands.

The arbitrariness problem is the problem that divine command theory appears to base morality on mere whims of God. If divine command theory is true, it seems, then God’s commands can neither be informed nor sanctioned by morality. How, though, can such morally arbitrary commands be the foundation of morality?

The emptiness problem is that on the divine command analysis of moral goodness, statements like “God is good” and “God’s commands are good” are rendered empty tautologies: “God acts in accordance with his commands” and “God’s commands are in accordance with his commands”.

The problem of abhorrent commands is that divine command theory appears to entail that if God were to command abhorrent acts—malicious deception, wanton cruelty, etc.—those acts would become morally good.

Divine command theory is by no means the only ethical theory in the Christian tradition, so the theist need not be overly concerned even if these objections were thought to be successful. There are, however, theological reasons why the theist might be attracted to divine command theory and so want to defend it. God is claimed to be the creator of all things, and therefore the creator of our moral obligations. God is claimed to be sovereign, to have the authority to tell us how we are to live our lives.

There are also a number of biblical examples of God commanding acts that would otherwise be thought to be morally wrong, acts such as plundering the Egyptians [Exodus 11:2] or preparing to sacrifice one’s son [Genesis 22:2], thus rendering them morally good. These considerations can most easily, though not only, be accommodated within a divine command theory of ethics.
http://www.philosophyofreligion.info/divinecommandtheory.html

Click to expand...

Flynmonkie said:

The Devine command theory is :


Disclaimer: I am not promoting the site this links to it is just a quickly reached good overview in laymans terms on the Ethical considerations of Devine Command.

Click to expand...

BigChrisfilm said:

Hmmmm, oh well. It was fun, but I think the questions were flawed anyway, as I do think it's important to follow God's laws, but that had nothing to do with how I think you get saved. Oh well.

Click to expand...

The twentieth century, contrary to popular myth, has hosted a number of great philosophers and theologians. It is my theory that the free time afforded more people, along with wider educational opportunities, has resulted in more time to ponder the grand issues. Theological philosophy has been “free” of Church restrictions, allowing a variety of views to be published.

Existential theology is a recognition that real faith and spiritual meaning cannot be found in organized religions, rituals, or texts. Adhering to religious rules, even those called “laws” within a religion, is not a sign of true faith. Existential theology demands that faith be individual. Because most people are born into a religion, they do not have a faith so much as a sense of community identity. The religion is a way to connect to other people, not a way to connect directly to the metaphysical. This does not mean that every person born into a religion lacks faith, but few people are genuinely spiritual.

The established or staate church of Denmark was the Lutheran Church. The nation considered it a God-given duty to protect the Church, to promote its welfare by instituting compulsory religious training in all schools, and to safeguard the clergy by assuring them a respectable economic level and by giving them the status of civil servants

It was against this system of security and state control that Kierkegaard rebelled. The security of a Christian Church meant to him the betrayal of every tenet of Christ’s teaching and example. … The anonymous early Christian followers were martyred, not honored, paid, and respected for belonging to the Church.
- Dostoevsky, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche & Kafka; Hubben, p. 25

For Kierkegaard, Dostoevsky, and even Nietzsche, the Christian churches of nineteenth-century Europe were not aligned with the teachings of Christ. Only the individual willing to question and challenge the churches could appreciate how far from the teachings and example of Jesus the churches had strayed. This was nothing new. Geoffrey Chaucer had mocked the clergy several hundred years earlier. What was potentially new was the existential description of faith.

The following individuals are key figures in modern theological discussions of existentialism:

• Karl Barth
• Martin Buber
• Gabriel Marcel
• Reinhold Niebuhr
• Paul Tillich

The Leap of Faith
For Kierkegaard, there is a moment when the believer realizes that faith is not reasonable, logical, or scientific. Trying to defend faith actually proves the believer has doubts. Faith is a surrender to something beyond what can be known. That churches and religious zealots try to prove the existence of the Creator(s) is evidence these individuals care more about what others think than what is personally experienced. Theological existentialism tends to view faith in the following light:

• Faith is a personal experience that can never be fully explained to others;
• Faith requires sacrifices emotionally and socially;
• Faith is usually damaged by religious organizations; and
• Faith is preceded by doubt and a quest for answers.

None of these concepts is alien to religion, but the theological existentialists see the alienation as far from extreme than previous philosophers. True faith is so apart from a group udnerstanding that it can only be damaged if the believer entrusts his or her spirituality to an organized church. Even explaining faith reduces its purity, to some degree, but it is important to be authentic and honest about believing.

http://www.tameri.com/csw/exist/ex_theo.html#tillich

Click to expand...