Eduqas Alevel RS Ethics 4c The implications of predestination and determinism

what does hard determinism say about moral responsibility

A persons actions are caused by an external event that they do not have control over , events experienced by the moral agent in their past dictates they choices they make in the modern day. It is accepted that there are some individual that cannot be held morally responsible because they are nit mature enough or of sound mind such as children or someone with dementia.

what does hard determinism say about the worth of human ideas and rightness and wrongness and moral value

Immanuel kant argued that our sense of duty the idea that we ought to act one way or another implies that we can do so. Human moral values are important training tools that are used to condition and them predict human behaviour these are used all the time by educators and parents who wish to control children's behaviours. Religions add power to their right and wrongs by encouraging their followers to look at the moral laws and see that they are equivalent to God's objective will

what does hard determinism say about the value in blaming moral agents for immoral acts

science demonstrates that a moral agents DNA, inherited from their parents dictates their physical characteristics and character traits. A persons genetic inheritance therefore dictates how they will behave in any given situation, blame implies some kind of punishment as a result of something that they have chosen to do. However if someone acts to break a moral law without art ability to behave differently it is difficult to see how blame prevents their immorality and makes the world a better place.

what is normative ethics

theories on principles of right and wrong (ex: sacrifice 1 life to save 5 lives)

what does hard determinism say about the usefulness of normative ethics

useful in setting at details of a persons obligations and how they should be achieved. Science can help to describe some aspects of a moral action or can investigate the causes of a moral acton but it is not equipped to make the kinds ov cake judgement that nominative ethics makes, it cant say that you have been forced to kill these 5 people to save one, it should be moral judgement not pre written actions.

what's does soft determinism say about moral responsibility

-soft determinisms argue that free will and determinism is compatible and people can therefore be held morally responsible for their actions, because you can choose out of the options what you do and you should always pick the most moral out of them. As Ayer pointed out freedom is the opposite to compulsion not determinism. If a persons actions is uncaused then a person should be held responsible for it. Moral responsibly should only be used when actions are within our control. Hobbes regard an agent as morally responsible provided the cause of there actions is internal and accordance with their will.

what does soft determinism say bout the worth of human ideas or rightness, wrongness and moral value

Ayer argued that terms such as good and bad have no objective value but they are used as a persuasive tool to conform to subjective standards of behaviour, This does not mean that human ideas of morality are worthless it just means that the value of right and wrong can never be scientifically measured. Rogers pointe out that science cannot comment upon the worth of human ideas or morality, Hobbes argued that a person who acts voluntarily does so freely even though they cannot choose their own will, some say that moral laws act as a constricting factors and others think that voluntary acts are always caused

what does soft determinism say about blaming moral agents for immoral acts

Ayer says that moral actions can be called free when a moral agent has not been compelled to perform. Fear of blame could be compelling factor and causes someone to change their actions, meaning the action cannot be called free. Therefore it should be up to us as to see if we should alert blame or not, depending if they acted due to an external or internal factor/ desires

what does soft determinism say about the usefulness of normative ethics

Ayer argued that normative ethics claims and budgeters do not describe facts about the world, they cannot be verified. Ayer acknowledged that when a person makes moral judgment if this kind they will have reasons including that their action bring about the greatest happiness to the greatest amount of people. Hobbes argued that since human nature tends to lean towards selfishness and is governed by the fear if death petiole are ineffective in choosing the right way to behave, arguing that society is governed by a power that supersedes religion

determinism: the worth of human ideas of rightness, wrongness and moral value

human ideas of rights and wrong are worthwhile:

- recognising the causes that operate upon us might help redirect them. Concepts of right or wrong provide incentives to do so

- ethical standards are not so intrinsically worthy, but able to help keep society in order, this is valuable in its practicality

- actions originating from an internal cause demonstrate the usefulness of a persons character as a member of society

human ideas of right and wrong are not worthwhile:

- philosophical determinism suggests our ideas of right and wrong are from prior cases, what I think is good doesn't originate from me because it is already determined

- Ayer would argue such ideas are just a result of an emotional response, so are meaningless even if we act in accordance with our feelings

- we are conditioned to believe that something are good and others and bad, the conditioning stimulus is from family and society and is hard to override

determinism: the value of blaming moral agents for immoral acts

there is value in blaming

- it is part of the conditioning stimulus needed to create a being who is useful to society, it shows them what is right and what is wrong even if they are predestined to think otherwise

- Hobbes sae two purposes in punishment: judging the value of an act, changing the behaviour of the agent

- if any action is not forced the agent can reasonably and morally be blamed for there action

there is no value in blaming:

- a persons will is brought about by antecedent causes so we might call it free but is more of a conscious necessity

- the Balme for an action lies prior to the agent who performs it. There is no sense in holding an agent morally responsible

- if a agent is violent beast they have a genetic predisposition to be violent then blaming them will have no effect

determinism: the usefulness of normative ethics

normative ethics are not useful

- if our behaviour is controlled by genes then no normative ethics will ever change the way we act

- normative ethics do not relate to any objective standard they are formed because of societal programming

- if we are not free then we cannot be praised or blamed for following rules therefore they are meaningless

normative ethics is useful:

- any normative theory can operate as a conditioning factor upon people tp ensure useful behaviour

- normative standards are practical for the running of society but relate to no objective standard

- if normative ethics are the result of an objective standard

predestination: the link between God and evil

AUGUSTINE

linked:

- God created eternal damnation, suggesting that he planned for the fact that we would fall

- God is a passive excuser of evil by failing to elect some fro heaven

- God is omniscient and so foreknew the veil humans would cause the he created us

- allowing evil in the world to remain condemn millions to hopeless and pointless suffereing

not linked:

- God did nit make evil he only created good things

- humanity's essential nature was free so it is our fault that we allowed evil to prevail

- God allows evil to stay so that we can understand good as something different

CALVIN:

linked:

God is responsible for evil as he created al thing s

- God is actively reprobated some so he condemns them to hell no matter how they act on earth

- the elect are still sinful, God saves them anyway apparently condoning evil deeds

- by predestining us, God performs evil acts condemning by scripture

not linked:

- God is benevolent , allowing the sinner to be forgiven through christ and so saved from evil

- God's damnation of some is a divine mystery and we should trust his divine authority

- God is linke dot evil through his rejection of it. By reprobating he demonstrates his total power

predestination: the implication for God's omnipotence and omnibenevolence

AUGUSTINE:

limited:

- God cannot be all loving if he only elects some to heaven and not all of us

- God's power is limited if he sits back and allows is to be damned by the actions of Adam

- God's power is limited if his creation can go wrong and become damaged

not limited:

- God remains uninfluenced by human activity. This means that means he retains his power

- God has provided salvation for the elect no human action is limited

- God introduced no evil at creation and it was a perfect gift for humanity, he loves us

CALVIN

limited:

- God is malevolent if he is actively pre reprobates people but still creates them anyway

- God planned for evil and created ut as part of the universe, he is powerful but evil

- if God is all loving but does not save us all then maybe he lacks the power to do so

not limited:

- God is fully omnipotent because he controls all actions and outcomes

- God is good an powerful because once we are predestined as the elect we cannot fall away

- justice demanded human punishment. God did not have to save anyone but he did out of love

predestination: the use of prayer and the existence of miracles

Religious people belied that God answers prayers of those who freely ask him for help and that God has the power to intervene in the natural course of events. But what happens if we are predestined.

AUGUSTINE:

- prayer is evidence that someone if faithful and thus one of the elect

- we are incapable of good acts after the fall, it is God's grace that allows prayer not free choice

- prayer will not change God or his plans in anyway

- christ's redemptive act on the cross is a miracle that was planned by God to save the elect

-miracles were planned in as part of God's created order when he created the world

CALVIN:

- prayer does not affect God or his preordained decisions regarding us. Prayer will not help us find out

- this seems to contradict scripture which tells believes to pray to God and he will hear them

- we cannot know whether God has elected our reprobated us, prayer will not help us find out

- if a miracle did occur, it would be because God ordained it not because w prayed for it

- if God planned every aspect of creation there is no needed for interference through miracles