Provide an Example of a Possible Confusion

Introduction

The understanding of ethics in the religious way of living is something that has several debates. Many human situations have particular consequences for the welfare of the rest. People are capable of helping or doing harm to others. We are thus able to act differently with our neighbors as a means of increasing or decreasing the quality of their lives. Ethical reasoning will, therefore, enhance two types of the well-being of others. One is that it may warrant our entire praise and harm or diminish the others' well-being.

One of the critical ethical insights to be acquired by humans is that ethics is most of the time confused with other critical means of thoughts that can bring about the failure to act ethically when he or she is assuming that they are acting ethically.

When ethics is mixed up and confused with the different ways of thinking, it is not common for conflicting social values and other taboos that may be treated as if they were universal ethical principles.Religious ideologies like the social rules and other laws are often mistaken to be ethical in nature. If these amalgamations of domains were to be accepted, then every practice that is within the religious system would imply that it is ethical, obligatory to the social rule and the law will ethically justify its means (Flannelly,? 2017). If at all religion were to be used to define ethics, we are not able to judge any other religious practices. These may be for example torturing or punishing the unbelievers or burning them as being ethical. On the same note, if ethical and the conventional thinking were considered to be the same, every social practice that is within any culture would, therefore, be ethically obligatory like the Nazi Germany.

Therefore, any social tradition, taboos or norms would not be condemned from the ethical standpoint, irrespective of how ethically bankrupt they were. If by chance the law defined ethics, then to a greater extent, the politicians and the lawyers would be great experts on the ethics and every law, then they would get on the books and try to figure out the status of the moral truth. Moreover, it is always essential to differentiate modes of ethics from other thinking modes that are mostly confused with ethics. We must, therefore, remain free and commonly critique the already existing and accepted common social conventions, political ideas, the religious practices and the laws that use ethical concepts that are not defined by extension using them.

Therefore, the idea of getting to distinguish between religion and ethics is vital as there are always most significant facts on the theological beliefs. Theological reasoning always gives answers to many metaphysical questions like the origin of things, the question of whether there is God or the possibility of having more than one God or what is their nature. Various religious beliefs are confused with the ethical principles. These include some members of the majority religious groups always enforce their beliefs on minorities. The members of the different religious groups act as if some of their theological views are true and thus scorning those who have different opinions. Besides, the same members of the religious beliefs fail to understand that sin' is a concept that is theological and not an ethical issue (DiCenso,? 2012). They fail to understand that sin is typically defined theologically and has nothing to do with ethics. Lastly, the different and most divergent religions usually define sin in various ways, and that they expect their points to be enforced and accepted by others and to be taken as a matter of global ethics.

Different beliefs about divinity and spirituality are mostly not based on the ethical concepts and principles in that they are not compulsory. There is not always a defining way to prove any set of the religious beliefs excluding the rest. Consequently, the religious freedom is always a human right. Anyone can objectively prove that instances of murder and assault are always harmful and not that non-believers of God can buy the same idea. An example is given where religious groups were to understanding that the order of birth was the firstborn male in every family must be given as a sacrifice, where every person in the entire group would be able to think that ethically supposed to kill the firstborn. Therefore, their religious beliefs are thus leading them to the unethical behaviors.

Besides, the ethical judgments must bring out the religious beliefs are shown as being undeniable and that the persons may be tortured and murdered by people who are to some extent motivated by religious motifs. Conclusion Theological beliefs cannot be used to override the principles of ethics. Therefore, people ought to turn to ethical principles to get protection from the entire intolerant and other oppressive practices of religion. Religious beliefs and ethics in society need to be distinguished accurately to ensure that there is no confusion between them, many religious aspects usually are confused and are hence taken to mean something that was not supposed to be mixed with the ethical consequences.

References

• DiCenso,? J. (2012).
• Kant's Religion within the boundaries of mere reason: A commentary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Flannelly, K.J. (2017).
• Belief in Meaning, Other Religious Beliefs, Religious Doubt, and Mental Health. Religious Beliefs, Evolutionary Psychiatry, and Mental Health in America, 315-324.

Did you like this example?

361

15