RESPOND TO BOTH PARTS FOR BOTH STUDENTS/100 words or more Per response to classmate. You can cite anything from Burnor, Richard and Yvonne Raley. Ethical Choices. New York: Oxford University, 2011. Print. ALSO for each students PART 2, this is the question they are answering just to give you better insight..“In this week’s module we took a look at what is often called the ‘Euthyphro Dilemma’. Socrates is looking for that characteristic that makes all holy acts and only holy acts, holy. Acts we saw might have all sorts of characteristics. They might be done slowly, frequently, in the evenings, in the presence of many other people, few people, etc. Are any of these characteristics (being slow, frequent, occurring in the evenings, being done in the presence of many people, few people, etc.) absolutely required for an act to be holy, or are they just incidental? Think of an example of a holy action. What absolutely must be part of it; what can be omitted without loss? Give your best answer, and as always be sure to provide your reasons for believing it to be the best answer.“
- Build the discussion by posting thoughtful and substantive, interactive responses of 100 words or more to your classmates’ posts.
- Interaction should include constructive criticism (positive and negative) offered in a supportive, collegial spirit. In an active learning experience such as discussion, constructive criticism can be a very powerful learning tool if offered in this manner.
- The following questions may be used as guidance for a good response:1.Do you agree with the view put forth? Why/why not?2.What are some of the strengths of such a view? How might one go aboutbuilding upon and developing such a view?3.What are some of the shortcomings of such a view? What sorts ofobjections come to mind to the view put forth? All written material must also conform to proper standards for spelling and grammar.
For case 11 on page 167 of thinking critically about ethical issues. The parties involved are the married person and their partner and the moral issue is the married person who wants to become celibate for religious reasons and their partner who was either not consulted or did not consent to that arrangement. This is not ethically justifiable because the person is placing their own religious beliefs above the needs of their marriage. Being married and religious myself I would say this is not recommended practice. In my religion becoming celibate for a period of time in order to concentrate more on your relationship with God is something that is done, however as a married person part of the planning for such an experience is consulting with your partner and detailing a specified amount of time you will be doing this for. Sexual intimacy is an important part of married life and of human existence. Withholding sex in this context would create marital issues for this couple. Using a utilitarian thought process creating marital problems for yourself would not have more “positive utility” than trying to be religious in a different manner (Burnor &Raley p.95). Using a care perspective, which “focuses upon feelings, relationships, and individual needs” you could conclude that by the partner withholding intercourse they are not fulfilling their care duties as a spouse (Burnor & Raley p.245). Intercourse is a way in which people communicate, nurture relationships and strengthen bonds as well as release stress and feel pleasure which would mean becoming celibate against their partners will would be hurtful and depriving their partner of all those benefits.
In order to think of an example of a holy act we must first define holy. According to Webster’s dictionary in the context we are looking at holy can mean “exalted or worthy of complete devotion as one perfect in goodness and righteousness” and also “devoted entirely to the deity or work of the deity”. Using this definition, we can assume that a holy act must be both moral and also dedicated to God and in turn be the only requirements for an act to be holy. An example of a holy act would be feeding the homeless, whether you do this frequently or not, in front of others or not would merely be incidental as the purpose of feeling the homeless would be to do a moral action by helping those in need and doing it for God as it would please him for you to act morally and do so in his name. You can tell the homeless about God or not but as long as you communicate it with God or know the reason you are doing it is to please God that would be a holy act. Morality pleases God and if we come to the conclusion of what is moral through any of the concepts we have learned through this course that would be pleasing to God.
In case 14, p 49 the identified parties are, the animal lovers, suburb of Los Angeles, parochial
school, priest-educator, the ten cats. One very important moral issue for me is the priest-educator killing the ten cats and believing that this was a “humane” act, concluding that by burying, and fertilizing the rose bushes his conscious was clear. The moral issue of not conducting himself like a priest, whose job is to cherish and protect all life including those that lack autonomy. The priest, should have acted with reason and rationality. He did not hold up the natural value of these animals by not preserving their lives.(Ruggiero p 49)(Bunor and Raley pp 182)
The similarities in all three cases, 14, 11, 12a seems to resemble a significant difference in how some people view morality and certain values. What some may conceive as morally important, and requiring a moral duty to protect the less fortunate, to make decisions that are what some would perceive to be unsatisfactory for normal society, others, and other cultures see as a normal and natural way of existence. The responsibility of the priest to protect those animals say a lot about his moral character. Those that cannot protect themselves historically children, “defective”, and sentient creatures are the ones that are most harmed and abused.
(Bunor and Raley p 200)
In these cases, there may even be a kind of moral egoism, were the other persons involved rights are non-recognizable to the interests to all others involved, the priest interests, opposed to the animal lovers, case 14, the missionary to the primitive jungle settlement, case 12a, and the one married person to the spouse, case 11.(Ruggiero pp 49, 167, 62)
All three cases, have been denied inalienable rights, which states the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.(Bunor and Raley p 195) The priest seems to have a utilitarian morality, and his utility would be the quiet and cleanliness he deserves.(Bunor and Raley p 111)
I do not believe holy acts to be slow, frequent, occurring in the evenings, in the presence of many people etc. I know that the sacraments are holy acts, one which I favor is the sacrament of last rites, or what it is officially called Viaticum, sacrament of the dying. Reconciliation, and Communion is given by the priest. The rites can be given by a layman, which is a non ordained person of the church, but only communion. You cannot be given reconciliation, and only the sick can be anointed by a priest or bishop. I believe that the last rites is one of the most sacred sacrament of all. When you are with a dying family member, it is one of the most beautiful moments you can share with them. Knowing that they have been absolved from their sins, and have received the sacrament of holy communion, if possible, before they pass, is very important and comforting for me. In my faith, I consider it an end to one adventure and a beginning of another journey.
Bunor, Richard, and Yvonne Raley. Ethical Choices an Introduction to Moral Philosophy
Cases.NewYork:Oxford University Press Inc.,2011…Web…Print…
Ruggeiro, Vincent. Thinking Critically About ethical issues.9th ed.NewYork:Mc-Graw Hill