Ok, here is my new post. It is based on Crystal's post about athiests and whatnot. We got into a discussion about whether ethics came about as a result of religion, or whether they came about on their own. So I would like to pursue this topic with more clarity so that we are all on the same page.
To that end, I have defined the relevant words: Religion, and Ethics.
re·li·gion Audio pronunciation of "religion" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (r-ljn)
n.
1.
1. Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
2. A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.
2. The life or condition of a person in a religious order.
3. A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
4. A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.
eth·ic Audio pronunciation of "ethics" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (thk)
n.
1.
1. A set of principles of right conduct.
2. A theory or a system of moral values: “An ethic of service is at war with a craving for gain” (Gregg Easterbrook).
2. ethics (used with a sing. verb) The study of the general nature of morals and of the specific moral choices to be made by a person; moral philosophy.
3. ethics (used with a sing. or pl. verb) The rules or standards governing the conduct of a person or the members of a profession: medical ethics.
4. motivation based on ideas of right and wrong
5. the philosophical study of moral values and rules
These definitions are brought to us by Dicitonary.com.
Now for religion. I tend to think of religion as definition 3. It seems like most -isms are based on the teachings of one or more religious leaders. For Catholicism, that spiritual leader is God. For Buddhism, the spiritual leader is Buddha. However, this is my personal view. We need to all agree on a central definition so that the argument can go forward.
And as for ethics. I tend to agree with definitions 1.1 and 4. They are very similar, but both say essentially the same thing. Ethics are codes of conduct based on the idea of "right". Course, if we do accept that definition, we need to figure out what is right, who determines it, and how it is determined. And that really is the heart of the debate. Has right traditionally and historically been determined by religion, or has it been determined on something else.
I will post the continuance of this later. Tell me how you define ethics and religion.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Ethics I agree with you on, religion I do not. To me religion must involve some outside source be it deity or power or something more. To me, religion entails mostly 1 and very little of anything else.
I do not think that 4 applies at all, I am an environmentalist, I follow the cause with conscientious devotion, it is not a religgion.
I think the key to the definition in 3 is spiritual leader. Confucinism is a way of life, it was taught by just a man, who died just a man, and believed in only mankind. He was teaching a way of life, not a religion. Yet confucianism and Zen Buddhism (there is spirituality in other forms of buddhism) are defined traditionally as religions.
They are not religions any more than Descart or Marx was a spirtual leader. Many philosophers preach to us a way of life, but they are not spiritual leaders and philisophical ideas or beliefs are not religions.
It is the same with several 'ways of life' that are currently defined as religions. A way of life is not a religion, it is mearly a way of life.
Or so is the way that I define religion for myself, because it all it took was following a set of values, beliefs and practices to be a religion we all have one. It simply encompases everything, it is to broad.
And thats my two cents
It seems no one likes you and wants to reply. Long time no see, how goes the wedding plans?
Post a Comment