Modern Morality: What Is Best? Essay, Research Paper

What is Best?

To state that modern morality consists in accepting the criterion of one & # 8217 ; s age is to state that human morality alterations with the passing of clip. This statement is unacceptable. Morality is non something of a craze. Morality should non travel through tendencies like the apparels we wear or popular music, morality is the foundation in which our society is embedded in, a foundation from which human values and criterions are derived. If we agree that these values and criterions are flexible within the boundaries of clip, and that they contain within them no land rooted infrastructure in society, so there is no manner in separating the difference between right and incorrect. Morality is what identifies the rules in which adult male exists, offprints good from bad, and right from incorrect, and every society should endeavor to detect and accomplish these rules. Morality should non alter over clip even though civilizations and societal stratifications do, what was morally right three thousand old ages ago is morally right today and should be morally right three thousand old ages from now. Merely with cosmopolitan rules can we, as corporate society, detect what is right, what is incorrect, and what is best, hence there exists non modern morality but merely morality.

An empirical philosopher, W.T. Stace, argues that if we believe all ethical motives are culturally comparative, it is impossible for us to judge what is best. Although acknowledging he does non cognize what is best, he concludes that it is the duty of adult male to detect what is. He does non challenge that moral imposts and moral thoughts differ from state to state and from age to age, but that the fact that one civilization thinks something is right does non needfully do it right merely every bit much as what we believe is incorrect in our civilization does non needfully intend it is incorrect. Stace quotes, & # 8220 ; What pleases one adult male, people of civilization displeases another. Therefore ethical motives are entirely comparative & # 8221 ; ( 544 ) . The clang in civilizations between the difference of morality does non intend that ethical motives are comparative ; all that it means is that unidentified civilizations and their beliefs remain nescient to the truth. However at the same clip we recognize this, we must be careful non to perpetrate to our ain moral codification as the acceptable 1. The lone truth that we can be certain of is that there is one universal and moral codification, and although we may non hold found it, we must swear that it is amongst us and that, through our experience and continual growth cognition, that we will come to it. This is non stating that there is one civilization within society today that defines the true moral codification, for what we know no civilization contains this. However as clip base on ballss, we build upon our cognition of truth in hunt for other truths that strengthen and farther set up our already turning understanding of what is right and incorrect and by making this we can detect certain values and beliefs from civilizations that are so merely and right.

Of class by proposing that there is the 1 cosmopolitan moral codification, one would hold to support this by besides connoting that there is a superior power that imposes this codification amongst us. To take the place of ethical tyranny would be rather hard to accomplish without the mention of God. Harmonizing to Stace, & # 8220 ; Men, we are told, in their disgust and disenchantment at the emptiness of their lives, are turning one time more to religion, or are search

ing for a new message” ( 546 ) . Our civilisation today is profoundly rooted in Christianity. The belief in God is really popular within our society. Equally much as we may seek to get away Christianity, it still remains with us. “No civilisation can populate without ideals, or to set it in another manner, without a house religion in moral thoughts. Our ideals and moral thoughts have in the past been rooted in religion” ( 547 ) . To believe or to accept the thought of one moral codification, one must believe that there is a God or a group of elect God’s who imposed this codification upon us. So there is, for most Christians, one individual God that regulations over the full existence and his wants are inked in the bible. Unfortunately, God’s wants are consistent around the Earth, and clip and age is of no significance. If some cultural group lives in incredulity of God so they merely live in ignorance of him, and it is to their effect that they are deprived. However so, since it is rather apparent that popular modern civilisation believes in God, it is hence sensible to presume that with this belief we accept God as the one superior swayer of the existence, like any other autocratic swayer.

If we are faithful to God we can presume that as our leader, he has given us regulations and ordinances to follow, and obey. God has non left us without way ; he has delivered to us a preexisting order that applies to all ages. An order in which he lays the foundation in which adult male is to follow, an order that if followed will present to every civilization on earth way and a end. To alter this preexisting moral codification of world as clip passes leaves the human race with no order. It would merely be impossible to state what is right and what is incorrect. What would be the evidences to bespeak it? How could anyone warrant his or her actions without the grounds that it was the best action? God, the adjudicator of all our destinies, decides what is good and what is bad. Killing in about all parts of the universe is considered an immoral action. If God determines that killing is unacceptable, so irrespective of what a certain civilizations beliefs are, their ethical motives and those beliefs are incorrect, and impermissible. However if it so happens that we have misinterpreted the sermon of God, and killing is acceptable, so the popular sentiment on this affair is incorrect. The point is that one of these ethical motives is right and one is incorrect. It is unacceptable to state that because one society is inferior to another, or differs in ways of another, than it is so acceptable for all civilizations to move in conformity with their ignorance and partake in unfair action.

To state modern morality consists in accepting the criterion of one & # 8217 ; s age is to propose that adult male can non happen the truth. If we are to accept the diverseness in ethical motives and moralss in the universe as a criterion to society we so accept that there is no right and incorrect, in bend there is no action that is best, and no action that can be justified. We must recognize certain values and beliefs that are nescient to those bids of God. Part of our mission is detecting the preexisting and cosmopolitan codification that God intends for us to detect. A preexisting, cosmopolitan moral codification that will function as a foundation for adult male to construct upon, a foundation where all work forces and adult females, while still being able to keep their civilization and individuality, will be able to populate by the same rules, and ethical motives as everyone else, a foundation where everyone knows what is right, what is incorrect, and what is best.