Philosophy and Religion
Name:
Course name
Course number
Date:
I
stipulate that I have worked on this assignment independently and have neither
received nor given assistance to any other students. I further agree not to
share information related to this assignment with any other students until the
assignment is returned and that failure to comply will constitute cheating. I
understand that cheating on an assignment constitutes grounds for course
failure and possible expulsion from the school.
Philosophy and Religion
1a) Socrates
means that people do not do wicked things intentionally. He says that people do
not will to do evil things. This may mean that those who end up engaging in
acts of wickedness do so because they do not have control. They are controlled
by some other power, other than their own will. In this case, he seems to blame
ignorance for people’s immoral ways. People do the wrong thing because they do
not have an idea of the right moral conduct. If they did, then they would
choose to do good and moral things instead of evil (Chaffee, 2013).
b)I do not agree with Socrates. He
seems to advocate the idea that people only have a choice of engaging in evil
ways and he blames ignorance for this. The same knowledge that people have when
they commit evil acts is the same knowledge that they should use to do good
deeds. Immoral conduct is a matter of choice and no one forces it upon another.
People often do wrong even though they are aware of the consequences of their
actions. I once worked in the retail section in one of the popular malls
around. One of my colleagues used to steal items from the store. He did this
regularly, and he would often choose to do it during the weekend when most of
the other workers were busy. He was aware that his actions were wrong. Other
people in the same store did not engage in the same behavior and they chose to
do the right thing.
c) Socrates questioned the decisions that people made and the knowledge they
used when making them. I think that Socrates would ask me how I know what the
right thing is. This would force me to evaluate the standards, which I use to
know the right from the wrong. Socrates would argue that it is not possible for
one to engage in worse actions if he had the power to make better decisions and
engage in the right actions. If I am taking illicit drugs, I know that the
right thing to do would be to quit and probably seek help. However, I lack the
will to do so even though I know the dangers associated with continuous drug
use. Socrates would ask me to evaluate the different actions to take, thus
forcing me to examine the possible consequences of continuing to engage in my
behavior. Some of the actions would appear better compared to others. Through
the process of evaluation, I would choose the best actions suggested
considering the circumstances.
2a).Socrates dispels the notion that the acquisition of wealth makes a person virtuous. A person does not have virtue simply because he has money and property. Instead, he argues that for a person to acquire wealth, he must first have virtue. He distinguishes the wealth that people have from other good things which they posses. A virtuous person does not always have wealth, but the virtues he has enable him to acquire money. Virtue, consisting of elements such as justice and wisdom, is essential for people to acquire the good things in life (Chaffee, 2013).
b). I agree with the fact that virtue does not come from wealth. A person’s financial status does not determine whether he is virtuous. Some rich people do not have any virtues. They do not practice justice and they do not value wisdom or truth. However, virtue is not necessary for a person to be wealthy. People are able to make money even without being virtuous. Some people engage in criminal acts, which are a form of injustice, and this enables them to make wealth. Some have stolen public money and they have enriched themselves. Some people have become wealthy by selling illicit drugs and other substances that harm the users. Other people have become wealthy by stealing and engaging in other criminal acts. Such people do not have virtue. They do not seem concerned about doing the right and moral thing, yet they continue to prosper financially. Other people are virtuous but they have remained poor. Their virtues have not enabled them to get any wealth.
3a). James
posits that some things come into existence only after one believes. A person
has to have faith, so that he can realize the possibility of a certain thing. One
can only show evidence of something if that thing exists. It is not possible to
provide evidence of many religions. Many people often depend on their faith as
a conviction of their religious beliefs. Waiting to provide evidence for the
existence of something denies a person the chance to have any religion. Jams
introduces the concept of forced option, meaning decisions that a person cannot
avoid, and momentous options, which are options that one may never happen again,
decisions that are hard to repeal or issues of fundamental importance. He
defines a hypothesis as something that a person may believe (Chaffee, 2013).
b). I tend to agree with the argument that James presents. Religion is a
tentative and controversial issue for many people. All religions largely
require people to have some element of faith. This happens whether one has a
physical semblance of the worshipped deity, such as in Hinduism or Buddhism, or
whether the believer solely depends on the evidence presented in sacred texts
such as the Christian Bibles or the Qurans. Many people find that they cannot
explain the reason for their religious convictions. It has become increasingly
hard to convince people to accept a certain religion because they demand some
level of evidence concerning the existence of the deities worshipped and the
validity of religious practices and customs. Some religions provide evidence of
their beliefs. Some may point out to a healing that took place or to God’s
wondrous creation. However, because of the advance made in science, people have
always found ways to explain such phenomena. Waiting for evidence to exist
before making the decision to accept religion denies a person the chance to
enjoy the benefits that can be derived from religion.
4a) Christianity does advance the idea of male supremacy. It requires that women submit themselves to their husbands and requires that men be the head of their households. The idea of a man’s role in Christianity follows from the concept of God. Biblical texts refer to God as a male. Jesus was a male and He is represented as the savior of humanity. There are few instances of women in the bible. The first woman that appears in the bible is shown as the cause of all human suffering. Men have always had dominant positions in the Bible. They are presented as brave warriors, judges, leaders, and kings. Their actions lead to the redemption and salvation of humanity. For instance, Moses leads the Israelites out of Egypt and Jesus dies for the salvation of the people.
b) Women have been the cause of major biblical events. God gave women power to the extent that they influence men in making decisions. Daly fails to recognize the fact that some women such as Miriam and Esther played a vital role in the bible. Esther made decisions that saved the Jews from death. She also fails to recognize men’s responsibility and the power of women in the story of the fall. Adam failed to protect Eve from the serpent, and the fall was partly his fault. Eve was powerful enough to convince Adam to eat the fruit even though he knew that it was against God’s will. Although Jesus was the savior of the world, He could only come into the world by being born of a woman.
c) I disagree with Daly because her sentiments are not objective. She fails to examine all the aspects of Christianity. She only looks at the facts that make her argument more convincing. This is evidenced by the fact that she fails to look at the contributions that different women have made in the Bible. The idea of God, as represented in the Christian teachings does not reflect patriarchy. People are responsible for misrepresenting biblical facts. God made men and women equal, and He gave men responsibilities on earth. The hypostatic-union is not oppressive in any way. It represents the sovereignty of God. Referring to God as the Father, conjures an image of love and care rather than that of a dominating presence.
Reference:
Chaffee, J. (2013). The
philosopher’s way: Thinking critically about profound ideas. Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice Hall