• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

'Some religious ethics are too rigid for moral decision making. Discuss

Extracts from this document...


(b) ?Some religious ethics are too rigid for moral decision making.? Discuss Divine command theory can be seen as too rigid for moral decision as morals depend on God?s wills. An act is morally right if it has been commanded by God and morally wrong if God has forbidden it. Right and wrong are therefore solely decided by God?s will or commands. Moral standards hence decisions became an objective matter because it is based on God. It only right if God the law-giver, the supreme moral governor commands it and wrong if it is not. It is rigid because it is not merely a matter of custom or personal feelings but relates to what God requires and commands. ...read more.


One must make the right decision by following God?s will always. This promoted unreflective mass conformism rather than responsible and intelligent individual decisions. However, the rigidness of the divine command theory can be doubted when the rules, e.g. those in the bible, can be broken on rare occasions. The idea that Christian ethics is founded on the love between God and humanity and for all humans for each other. The rules generally uphold love, but on the occasions the principle of love requires going against the rules e.g. Jesus himself implied that human need can overrule the normal order of things by justifying the breaking of the Sabbath law ?the Sabbath was made for man and not man for the Sabbath?. ...read more.


Situation Ethics being a type of Christian ethics further developed self-sacrificing love based on Jesus? teachings as the basic moral principle. The moral value of an action is judged according to the consequences which it produces. One has to choose the course of action that most exemplifies self-sacrificing love. Situation Ethics is not at all rigid as it encourages rational calculation of likely consequences hence opens up different possibility of choices. Situation Ethics rejects the authoritative or absolute status of all prescriptive principles which legislate irrespective of particular situation. It rejects absolutes such as ?never? or ?always? hence all other principles are negotiable in terms of how far they produce love.It is a flexible ethical system where we choose love as our guiding moral principle and decide our values. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Practical Questions section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Practical Questions essays

  1. Utilitarianism VS Kantian Deontological Ethics

    I reject utilitarianism, primarily on the basis that it is seems to be incompatible with human rights. For example, if slavery or torture is beneficial for the population as a whole, it could theoretically be justified by utilitarianism. Utilitarian theory thus seems to overlook the rights of minority groups.

  2. Discuss the Relationship between law and morals. Consider how far the law seeks to ...

    This makes it illegal to possess any obscene material with a view to its sale or other publication. An example of this put into action is in the case of Shaw v DPP (1961). In this case the defendant had published a booklet of the names, addresses, photographs and other

  1. Evaluate the claim that conscience is a reliable guide to ethical decision making.

    Is Butler's conscience reliable? It would seem to me that, in as much as we can trust ourselves, Butler's c?onscience is reliable. But, directed as it is by the all too corruptible public affections, how much can we trust the dictates of our emotions, however benevolent they may be in essence.

  2. Business Ethics

    * May be well intentioned, but they do not see that their business decisions and actions may be hurting those with whom they transact business or interact. Typically, their orientation is towards the letter of the law as their ethical guide.

  1. "Environmental policy can't be based solely on efficiency arguments. Issues of ethics are at ...

    Rather than a system whereby the government defines the measures that need to be taken by industry or where it is left to the polluter to deal with the control methods as with the previously mentioned CAC policies, the idea of Coase's theorem defines a policy where, "if transaction costs

  2. Situation Ethics and Moral Decision Making.

    Fletcher agreed with particular teachings in Natural Law, and he also agreed with numerous teachings throughout the Utilitarianism theory. For Fletcher, both antinomian and legalistic theories had flaws, in that legalism doesn?t allow enough personal freedom, whereas antinomianism allows too much freedom and lacks helpful guidelines.

  1. There are no moral absolutes, discuss.

    Moreover, some relativist arguments when further analysed have absolutist roots, proving there are moral absolutes. For example, the Eskimo practice of leaving female infants out to die as so future male hunters could thrive appeared to be a significant disagreement between their moral systems and ours therefore seeming to deny the universal approach of Absolutism.

  2. Explain the approach of Situation Ethics to moral decision making.

    Biblical support can be found for this theory through the teaching of Jesus: 1 John 3v23 ? ?Believe in the name of his son Jesus, and love one another as he commanded us.? Fletcher proposed four main principles for moral decision making: pragmatism, relativism, positivism and personalism.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work