...The Bible: A Dogma or a Set of Guidelines? Dietrich Bonhoeffer Kayla Tremblay November 27, 2012 The Bible: A Dogma or a Set of Guidelines Dietrich Bonhoeffer November 27, 2012 I. Introduction a. Dietrich Bonhoeffer i. Biography ii. Christianity and War iii. Thesis: As demonstrated by Bonhoeffer in his war against socialism, religion cannot be looked at as a dogma and instead should be a malleable doctrine that is subjective to history. II. Body b. Christian Doctrines iv. Fundamental guidelines v. Use of the bible 1. Hitler a Christian? vi. No rules in war c. Moral Ethics vii. Ethics of Conviction vs. Ethics of Responsibility viii. Rationality d. Just War Theory ix. St. Thomas Aquinas x. Guidelines for a Just War xi. Just War is applicable e. What about Christians and Pacifists? xii. “Put your sword away” xiii. No such thing as a “Just War” III. Conclusion f. Summary xiv. Thesis: As demonstrated by Bonhoeffer in his war against socialism, religion cannot be looked at as a dogma and instead should be a malleable doctrine that is subjective to history. g. So what? xv. Accomplishments xvi. Interpretation xvii. Cost-benefit analysis Dietrich Bonhoeffer was a Lutheran pastor and theologian living in Germany during the time of Nazi...
Words: 2774 - Pages: 12
...AS Philosophy of Religion 2001 1. (a) What are the key features of the design argument for the existence of God? (10 marks) (b) Identify the strengths of this argument. To what extent are these strengths more convincing than its weaknesses? (10 marks) 2. (a) Describe the main strengths and weaknesses of the cosmological argument for the existence of God. (14 marks) (b) To what extent do the weaknesses of this argument limit its effectiveness? (6 marks) 3. (a) Examine the characteristics of BOTH a religious and a scientific interpretation of the origins of the universe. (14 marks) (b) Comment on the view that the differences between these interpretations rule out any major disagreement between them. (6 marks) 4. (a) What do religious believers mean by the ‘problem of suffering’? (5 marks) (b) Select any TWO theodicies and consider how far they offer solutions to this problem. (15 marks) 5. (a) Examine TWO philosophical reasons for belief in miracles. (6 marks) (b) Outline at least TWO problems with belief in miracles. (8 marks) (c) Consider the claim that there are no acceptable solutions to these problems. (6 marks) 2002 1. (a) Outline the design argument for the existence of God. (7 marks) (b) ‘The design argument fails because of its weaknesses.’ Examine and comment on this claim. (13...
Words: 3353 - Pages: 14
...Mohammad Khattak Ethics for Mangers (ETM-750) Prof: Robert Bigelow Final Project The Syrian Conflict Evaluate the ethics of any legal or ethical issue in the news. Analyze the dilemma or issue. Thoroughly evaluate the appropriateness of applying at least two ethical frameworks reviewed in the course, and suggest an approach that might help to avoiding such dilemmas/issues in the future. What started off as an uprising and eventually led to a civil war, has destroyed much of Syria and resulted in the death of hundreds of thousands. And no matter what angle you look at it from, the existing regime under the command of Bashar Al Assad and his so-called "war against terrorists" has broken all barriers of ethics, morals and rules of war. Many sources have claimed foreign interference to have ignited the situation, but at the same time, the regime has spared no efforts to suppress the voice of those who stood up against the oppressive rule. But the dilemma does not end with how the situation was dealt with by the existing rulers. Nations all around the world are waiting on how the United States of America responds to the happening and whether the US can justify its reason for intervention, which it believes to be its moral duty under the principle of its 'Just War Theory'. Utilitarianism One of the ethical frameworks that would apply to the Syrian situation would be the act and rule of Utilitarianism that dictates that the actions of a party be justified so...
Words: 1654 - Pages: 7
...The Concept of “Just War” BY: Ahmed Bayoumy Moter 201400746 Philosophy 101 Massacre at first glance is not an accepted act by humanitarian authorities. As Predominantly killing people cannot be considered a moral action if we defined the ethical acts according to the cultural relativism or even ethical subjectivism. Nonetheless, the concept of Just War (JW), developed from the time of St. Augustine, has another point of view regarding butchery. As it states that to start an ethically justifiable war it must be for a just cause, declared by a lawful authority, the last solution after trying all the possible ways of solving the problem, and have a high probability of success [1]. The theory of JW is divided into three main segments:...
Words: 1515 - Pages: 7
...Greek φιλοσοφία (philosophia), which literally means "love of wisdom". The introduction of the terms "philosopher" and "philosophy" has been ascribed to the Greek thinker Pythagoras. The Main Branches of Philosophy are divided as to the nature of the questions asked in each area. The integrity of these divisions cannot be rigidly maintained, for one area overlaps into the others. A. Axiology: the study of value; the investigation of its nature, criteria, and metaphysical status. More often than not, the term "value theory" is used instead of "axiology" in contemporary discussions even though the term “theory of value” is used with respect to the value or price of goods and services in economics. Axiology is usually divided into two main parts. Ethics: the study of values in human behavior or the study of moral problems: e.g., (1) the rightness and wrongness of actions, (2) the kinds of things which are good or desirable, and (3) whether actions are blameworthy or praiseworthy. Æsthetics: the study of value in the arts or the inquiry into feelings, judgments, or standards of beauty and related concepts. Philosophy of art is concerned with judgments of sense, taste, and emotion. B. Epistemology: the study of knowledge. In particular, epistemology is the study of the nature, scope, and limits of human knowledge. C. Ontology or Metaphysics: the study of what is...
Words: 3455 - Pages: 14
...ASSIGNMENT ETHICS IN POLITICS SEMESTER 2 2014/2015 KULLIYYAH OF ISLAMIC REVEALED KNOWLEDGE AND HUMAN SCIENCES, INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY MALAYSIA PSCI 4610 INSTRUCTOR Dr.Aldila ishak NO. | NAME | MATRIC NO. | SECTION | 1 | MUHAMMAD NAZRI BIN MOHMUD HUSSIN | 1031189 | 1 | | | | | Just War Theory: An Introduction. Just war theory is an interesting idea which constitutes both elements of ethics and politics to form a theory that describe the ethical and political relationship between states and sovereignty. Just War theory can be describes as an attempt to reconcile war with morality. Its main objective was to give justification for a state to launch an attack towards another state provided they have a valid reason to do so. From this we can come to define just war theory as a theory that specifies conditions for judging if it is just to go to war, and conditions for how the war should be fought (BBC, 2014). Just War theory is often associated with Christianity as it was first developed through biblical teachings by Christian theologians, St Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas. Even though Just war theory started from biblical teaching it does not mean that Christianity endorses violence or war but instead the ultimate goal is peace. War can...
Words: 2655 - Pages: 11
...remain a moral possibility?’ (60) he cites four justifications for war. What are they? From a pacifist’s point of view why are these reasons problematic? In this article the four justifications for going to war are: defense of the innocent, recovery of something wrongly taken, punishment of evil, and defense of aggression in progress. From a pacifist's point of view there are some major problems with these justifications for war. Each and every justification is met with its own singular problem. The defense against the innocent seems like it is justified but there arises two arguments against it. In a war more than just soldiers are killed. Other civilians will be killed and many of the soldiers don’t want to fight, they are just ordered too. That means we are killing innocent civilians and soldiers to protect some innocent. From a utilitarian view we must ask if this the death of the innocent will outweigh the death of the other innocent if we do or don’t go to war. Yet, deontologists would say that killing is bad and that needs to be punished because killing is wrong. So kill people to stop killing. For a pacifist that is just wrong. The other problem from defending the innocent is that violence is key in war and many times over we have been shown that violence is not always the best way. We should try and support people and ideas like Gandhi, to win with non-violence. There is not always a need for full war if we can help these people peacefully. Then there is the problem...
Words: 2443 - Pages: 10
...RELATIVISM AND MORALITY Week 2 Assignment Sarah Knight SOC120: Introduction to Ethics and Social Responsibility Prof. Thomas Reeder November 4, 2013 Relativism and Morality Moral choices are conducted on a daily basis, by every culture, which can be viewed on an ethical scale of right or wrong, by other cultures. In her writing of “Some Moral Minima”, Lenn E. Goodman views several aspects of morality and relativism, and argues that certain things are just wrong. In presenting my own morals, I agree with this statement; however, pondering the image, that only one accurate ethic exists and that we may be able to find universal moral requirements and arrive at a multiethnic agreement on issues presented by Goodman is a parable. In this paper, I will state my opinion on challenges Goodman presents to relativism. I will also provide my thoughts on if there are such universal moral requirements. In Goodman’s initial area of discussion of “Some Moral Minima; Genocide, Famine, and Germ Warfare (Goodman, L.E., 2010)”, she states “Genocide targets individuals as members of a group, seeking to destroy a race, a culture, a linguistic or ethnic identity (Goodman, L.E., 2010)”. I reflect back to after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks were made on The United States. The threat of germ warfare became a very real aspect of war for our nation. Governmental groups, that we were at war against, were considering the decision to use this type of weapon in order to defeat their...
Words: 1212 - Pages: 5
... NALANDA NEERAJ PHIL-315 13609044 FINAL 1) Explain Friedman’s arguments about social responsibility? In 1970 Milton Friedman wrote that "there is one and only one social responsibility of business--to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits so long as it stays within the rules of the game, which is to say, engages in open and free competition without deception or fraud." That's the orthodox view among free market economists: that the only social responsibility a law-abiding business has is to maximize profits for the shareholders. Friedman’s article also contains a much less discussed point that deserves more attention. In particular, I believe it should be taken more seriously by people ideologically opposed to the values associated with Friedman. The simple point is how Friedman argues that acceptance of CSR(Corporate Social Responsibility) “involves the acceptance of the socialist view”. For Friedman, the logical step from CSR to socialism means that companies should not engage in CSR. For me, it means that now that the companies are making CSR claims all over the place, socialists might want to point out the ideological dilemmas of this practice. As the power of big corporations has become increasingly evident, their legitimacy may erode if they stop making claims about their social responsibility. The dilemma is that if and when they continue making these claims, they implicitly accept that capitalist...
Words: 1413 - Pages: 6
...Theory of Just War Group II How do we decide wars? How do we determine the ethical justification for war? When we think about war do we think solely about the act of war or the reasoning behind the war? Do we also need formal declaration of war to consider it to be real? There are many definitions of war with the most common being "a state of usually open and declared armed hostile conflict between states or nations". Using this definition we can refer to many examples of war such as the American Civil War, World War I and World War II but by another definition we confront many wars undeclared. War by another definition is "a struggle or competition between opposing forces or for a particular end". With this definition not only are the aforementioned wars included but also conflicts such as the Civil Rights Movement and the Holocaust can now be considered war as well. In its most simplistic view, wars happen because of disagreements. These conflicts, whether on a large or small scale have been due to a point of view, standard, or ethical value. Just war is as it sounds; it is the justification of why and how one decides to fight wars. It is a philosophical look at the ethics behind going to war with a different country, organization, group, society, etc… The truth behind the majority of wars that are started is the fact that most people cannot agree on religion, everyone has their own different beliefs and still they somehow cannot agree to disagree, or to just accept...
Words: 620 - Pages: 3
...a concentration of fire at the enemy, Vietnam, 8 May 1968 Issue indivisibility occurs when the two parties cannot avoid war by bargaining because the thing over which they are fighting cannot be shared between them, only owned entirely by one side or the other. Religious issues, such as control over the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, are more likely to be indivisible than economic issues. A bigger branch of the theory, advanced by scholars of international relations such as Geoffrey Blainey, is that both sides decide to go to war and one side may have miscalculated. Some go further and say that there is a problem of information asymmetry with incentives to misrepresent. The two countries may not agree on who would win a war between them, or whether victory would be overwhelming or merely eked out, because each side has military secrets about its own capabilities. They will not avoid the bargaining failure by sharing their secrets, since they cannot trust each other not to lie and exaggerate their strength to extract more concessions. For example, Sweden made efforts to deceive Nazi Germany that it would resist an attack fiercely, partly by playing on the myth of Aryan superiority and by making sure that Hermann Göring only saw elite troops in action, often dressed up as regular soldiers, when he came to visit. The American decision to enter the Vietnam War was made with the full knowledge that the communist forces would resist them, but did not believe that the guerrillas had...
Words: 1486 - Pages: 6
...With the discussion of unjust and just war has occurred in connection with whether terror-bombing is a just means to pursue a war, or the do it even mean to initiated one in accord with justice. Just war deontological theory is the relationship between duty and the morality rules of the military action, which will result in the good for the welfare of the people in the village that the war is taken place at. Failing to abide by the general rules that have been setup for the U.S. government will result in immorally behavior. When dealing with deontological, there is no room for subjective feelings, because it will leave room for question and it does not deal with ethics, but it does concentrate on prudence. Jus in Bello theory distinguishes how the military will are may treat the combatants and how we will treat noncombatants on the battlefield. The jus ad bellum doctrine is the standard war between the nation’s issues of what...
Words: 720 - Pages: 3
...Justifiable Terrorism in Total Wars Molly Thomson 201311503 Political Science 1000-03 March 18th, 2014 The word ‘terrorism’ instantly makes people shudder; the negative connotations and controversies surrounding terrorism in modern society are enough to spark a discussion of whether it is justifiable or not. In order to determine whether or not terrorism can be justified, a clear definition must be decided upon. Decades before the attacks on the World Trade Center in New York City on September 11, 2001, the definition of the word terrorism was hard to define. Political figures around the globe argued and disagreed on what they thought should have determined the act of terrorism. Now, there are multiple different definitions originating from distinct cultures and societies, suggesting that terrorism is in the eye of the victim. One definition of terrorism is “any violent or criminal act planned for a political or ideological purpose”; while another claims that terrorism is understood to be a direct attack on innocents. Since both of these definitions have important components to them, it can be assumed that both traits are essential to defining terrorism. For the purpose of this paper, the definition of terrorism will be understood as ‘a violent attack on innocents for the purpose of political change’. It can be hard for most people to understand the act of injuring and/or killing hundreds, or maybe even tens of thousands of people, as justifiable. However, if the innocents are...
Words: 1878 - Pages: 8
...seem necessary, seeing that God is provides and protects those who follow him. Throughout the reading of The Gospel According to Matthew an anti-materialistic approach is used; “contempt for even the necessities of life and the assurance that ‘God will provide’” (Newton, Source Reader, p. 61). For example, the young rich man in the reading asks God what good deed he can complete in order to receive eternal life. God first suggests to the man to follow the Ten Commandments, the man states that he has been following the Ten Commandments since he was a young boy. God then suggests that he sell his possessions, give to and give to the poor in order to achieve a pass into heaven. The use of technology during this time is not necessary seeing that just as long as a person has love for God, follows the Ten Commandments, and lives life accordingly to God’s wishes then what is the use of technology? Similar, is the subject of science, which the Bible does not...
Words: 1833 - Pages: 8
...Terrorism and Ethics PHI208 Rebecca Wilson January 24, 2015 Terrorism and Ethics Since the beginning of time, humans have fought one another to establish power. More specifically, Americans have been involved in many wars over the years. Some of these wars have been about nothing more than a power trip, but more recently there has been an ongoing war against terrorism. When thinking of a war and the violence that comes along with it, it seems as though all measures should be taken to prevent such a tragic resolution. When those measures are not successful, or an attack is made on an opposing country, war is usually inevitable, especially when there is terrorism involved. The question arises: Is war on terrorism ethical and just? Using the utilitarian and deontologist theories, I will demonstrate how war on terrorism is in fact justified. Utilitarianism is the theory that the consequences of an action determine the morality of the act; it is also focused on an outcome that appeases the majority (Mosser, 2013). For example, if my children both like pepperoni only on their pizza, and we are a family of three, it would make the most sense to order a pepperoni pizza rather than a deluxe since the pepperoni appeases both children. Since utility is based on consequences, this scenario works because while I enjoy deluxe pizza and it would please me, my children are the majority and pepperoni isn’t bad at all. When applying this ethical theory to the topic of war on terrorism...
Words: 849 - Pages: 4
