Religion and Ethics Week 2
Description
Required Resources
Read/review the following resources for this activity:
Textbook: Chapters 3, 4
Lesson
- Minimum of 1 scholarly source (in addition to the textbook)
- Initial Post Instructions
- St. Augustine in the 5th Century held that we are free to make choices in life. This is the idea of free will. It may seem at first glance odd for a religious thinker to say that we have free will. After all, if God exists, then God created all things. God knows already what we will do. God can cause anything to occur. If we cause things to occur, that seems to be a limitation on the power of God and not make God all-powerful.
There are also religion traditions that say that we have no free will. There are some theologians in Islam who seem to suggest that is true. In order for this line of reasoning to hold true, one would need to believe free will is an illusion and that we have no control over how we live our lives, but rather that we are puppets moving and acting due to God’s will and the powers of destiny and fate. And if this then in the case, how can we possibly be responsible for our actions?
The considerations above show us to what degree our religious beliefs can shape us. For instance, someone who believes in free will may experience way more guilt than someone who believes we don’t have free will and thus aren’t responsible for the choices (and consequences) of the actions we take.
Personal struggles with religion and ethics occur in many places, including in the healthcare arena. Consider the following: You are a nurse in a hospital. A 12 year-old was brought to the hospital by an ambulance. The parents have just arrived at the hospital. This 12 year-old has lost a large amount of blood and requires a transfusion. The parents happen to be members of a religion that believes that blood transfusions are immoral. They want to remove the child from the hospital and prevent the transfusion even if it means the death of the child. You have to decide whether or not you will participate in an action that violates the will of the parents and aid in providing blood for the child. If you choose to participate, and even if you are able to legally justify it, you have to think about the distress you are creating for the parents. If you refuse to aid here, you may be subject to retaliation from the hospital. What is the moral thing for the nurse to do here?
For the initial post, address the following questions:
What would a divine command ethicist say is the moral thing to do here? Why would they say that? Do you agree with the divine command ethics? Why or why not?
Evaluate what a natural law ethicist would say is right to do. Do you agree with them? Why or why not?
Given what you said are the right things to do, what would an emotivist say about your positions and judgments? What role does subjectivity play here in determining what is ethical?
- Follow-Up Post Instructions
- Respond to at least one peer. Further the dialogue by providing more information and clarification.
- Writing Requirements
Minimum of 2 posts (1 initial & 1 follow-up)
Minimum of 2 sources cited (assigned readings/online lessons and an outside scholarly source)
APA format for in-text citations and list of references
Grading
- This activity will be graded using the Discussion Grading Rubric. Please review the following link:
- Link (webpage): Discussion Guidelines
Course Outcomes
- CO 2: Examine the relation between ethics and religion via a valuation of divine command and natural law ethics as ways of determining the morality of actions
CO 3: Argue the importance of subjectivity in ethics and interpret the significance of emotivism as an explanation of moral propositions.
Posts must be on two separate days.
REPLY
According to the philosophical idea known as “divine command theory,” moral and ethical standards are derived from religious dogma and the directives of one or more gods (Rachels & Rachels, 2019). Professional norms in the medical field place a strong emphasis on treating individuals with empathy and consideration because all people deserve humanity (Sus (MA) & Drew (PhD), 2023). According to this kind of thinking, an ethicist who believes in a divine command might maintain that it would be morally right to decline the blood transfusion. This is due to the family’s strong religious conviction that blood is sacred and receiving blood transfusions from another person is prohibited and that treatments of this kind should not be carried out. For myself, I remain indifferent. However, I do support divine command ethics thinking because, regardless of our opinions on such practices, people should be free to follow their own beliefs and cultural standards.
According to the ethics and philosophy notion known as “natural law,” human beings are moral beings with innate values that direct their actions and thoughts (Chappelow, 2020). According to natural law, persons are born with certain moral precepts; they are not established by society or legal authorities (Chamberlain University, 2024). In the end, we are stating that since God commanded things to be as they are, it is sinful to violate their purpose. We then transgress what God has declared to be the proper justification for doing when we act contrary to its intended outcome. This implies that proponents of natural law ethics would decide to give children blood-related products to try and rescue them. They contend that if we can preserve a child’s life, we should accomplish it regardless of whether it goes against the family’s convictions regarding religion. I would honor the family’s wishes, though, as I firmly think that everyone should live their own life and that blood-related goods are not customarily given. That said, there are many options besides obtaining blood products that can be implemented.
Emotivism is the theory that moral assessments are less like objective declarations of truth and more like the emotions and ideas of the person making them. In the end, I think the parents should have the power to decide whether to proceed with the treatment or consider any other options that could be able to assist the child. Considering the child’s age, I want to ensure they understand the situation and that their perspective is considered. Assent means a child’s affirmative agreement to participate in medical practice (Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, 2022). An emotivity would believe this is wrong to do, given that potentially the child will suffer due to religious restrictions. The theory known as ethical subjectivism holds that our moral judgments are only based on our emotions (Rachels & Rachels, 2019). In conclusion to this perspective, right and wrong don’t exist.