Wholly Naturalistic Explanation for Moral in Religious Belief Research Paper Hello. I have an easy for my religion class, I’m working on showing both sides
Wholly Naturalistic Explanation for Moral in Religious Belief Research Paper Hello. I have an easy for my religion class, I’m working on showing both sides religion and science on the topic of morals. attached file is one sources. please keep it sample I’m gonna work on it too. cite sources. it is for an introduction class Copyright @ 2008. Templeton Press.
All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law.
8. Can Science Provide a Wholly
Naturalistic Explanation
for Moral and Religious Beliefs?
(how does morality relate to religion?)
?
Religion and Morality in the Semitic Traditions
The moral dimension, both individual and social, is so important to
religion that some scholars see religions primarily as ways of life rather
than sets of doctrines or vehicles for certain sorts of experiences. Most
religions contain all these elementsmorality, doctrine, and experiencebut they are weighted di?erently. The oldest Semitic faith, the
Hebraic precursor of rabbinic Judaism, is often seen as primarily a religion of Torah. This can be translated as law, but, in English, that word
may convey a misleading impression of just a set of rules to be evaded
wherever possible. For a Jew, the written Torah is the whole biblical narrative from Genesis to Deuteronomy, and the oral Torah is found in
the Babylonian Talmud, the main object of study for Jewish religious
scholars.
The biblical narrative is an account of history, especially that of the
children of Abraham who are believed to be inheritors of a covenant
with the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. It recounts that people were
taken into slavery in Egypt, escaped by the help of God, and wandered
forty years in the wilderness until they came to the borders of the promised land. The narrative de?nes the self-understanding of Jews as bound
in a unique relationship to God, as saved from oppression by mighty acts
of God, as wandering in the wilderness of the world, in a state of halfrebellion and half-obedience to God, and as heirs of a promise of justice
and peace that seems to be inde?nitely deferred.
The statutes and ordinances given to Moses by Godtraditionally,
but rather arbitrarily, numbered at 613belong to this historical narrative. They de?ne a way of life in relation to God, a way to true human
ful?llment, in a society of justice, mercy, happiness, and well-being (shalom) in the worship and love of God, who is supreme goodness.
Torah is not a universal morality for the whole world. It sets Jews apart
EBSCO : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) – printed on 4/3/2019 3:33 PM via UNIV OF EVANSVILLE
AN: 380247 ; Ward, Keith.; The Big Questions in Science and Religion
Account: s6491485.main.ehost
Copyright @ 2008. Templeton Press.
All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law.
192
can science provide an explanation for beliefs?
as a covenant people, and its ritual and food laws are quite distinctive.
Even what may seem to be purely moral rules are seen as imitations of
divine goodness or as recollections of a history of slavery, liberation, and
hope. Remember that you were slaves in Egypt becomes a motivation
for treating others with compassion, in recognition that God wills liberation for all creatures.
Because the rules belong to a historical narrative and de?ne a way of
relationship to God who wills human ful?llment, they cannot be lifted
out of context and applied in a literalistic way, with no thought of the
consequences of such application in very di?erent circumstances. They
need to be interpreted and applied by a judicial and scholarly process.
This is living law, and its underlying principles must be sought and
applied in historically appropriate ways.
There will always be a tension between conservative attitudes, which
regard the preservation of a distinctive culture as important, and liberal
attitudes, which are more inclined to revise ancient rules in the light of
new scienti?c or moral insights. But for neither view is Torah just a set
of unchangeable commands issued by an omnipotent tyrant who will
ruthlessly punish all who disobey.
The law was given by God to a particular group of displaced and
nomadic people in what we now call the late Bronze Age. The conditions of Jewish life have changed radically since then. With the destruction of the second Temple in 135 ce, all the sacri?cial and ritual laws
were rendered obsolete. Joshua ben Hananiah, around 100 ce, formally
declared that the seven nations of Canaan are no longer identi?able,
thus rendering all laws concerning the conquest of Canaan obsolete.
Most of the punitive laws and some of the marital laws (concerning
levirate marriage or the possession of concubines, for example) are also
regarded as obsolete.
One reason for this is the eighth- to sixth-century bce teaching of the
major prophets, who insisted that justice, mercy, and loving-kindness
are the heart of the law. Jesus was stating widespread rabbinic opinion
when he said that the two most important commands of the law were to
love God (absolute beauty and goodness) and to love ones neighbor as
oneself. Rabbis must seek to interpret the law in the light of these commands and after thinking out their implications.
This revision does not reduce the ancient laws to irrelevance, but it
calls for discernment of underlying principles and for new ways of applying those principles in contemporary situations. The law exists as a way
of binding a particular people to God in a deeply personal relationship
and as a way to human ful?llment in relation to God. The speci?c biblical rules are like normative precedents that must be creatively interpreted
EBSCO : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) – printed on 4/3/2019 3:33 PM via UNIV OF EVANSVILLE
AN: 380247 ; Ward, Keith.; The Big Questions in Science and Religion
Account: s6491485.main.ehost
Copyright @ 2008. Templeton Press.
All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law.
how does morality relate to religion?
193
in many situations by judicial and scholarly argument and discussion.
People sometimes miss the important role of argument and judicial
disagreement in Judaism, though it is quite clear in the Talmud. The
point about this being the law of God is not that its speci?c rules are
unchangeable but that its principles preserve ways of life that encourage reverence and love for Supreme Objective Goodness (for God), an
attitude of respect and care for all God has made, and a faith and hope
that Gods purpose for the ?ourishing of goodness on the earth will be
realized.
Jewish religion gives morality a transcendent dimension, rooting it
in love of a Supreme Objective Good and in a desire to make goodness
known and e?ective in history. Like all human societies, Jewish society
is in practice an ambiguous mixture of success and failure in this task
and of insight and obtuseness about exactly what Supreme Goodness
requires. But, in the Jewish prophetic tradition, religion is raised from
being a commerce with spirits aimed at achieving greater personal success to being a submission of the heart to one supreme living and active
moral Ideal.
Islam also sees God as setting out, through the Prophet, a way of justice and peace that will relate all human life to Supreme Goodness. It
universalizes the idea of law (Sharia), but bequeathes to its followers
the same problems of interpretation and authority that make Judaism
in practice a diverse set of communities united by the central thought of
self-abandonment to God.
Christianity abandons the idea of a revealed written law, replacing it
with the personal life of Jesus as the revelation of Divine Goodnessa
revelation of the supremacy of su?ering, sel?essness, healing, and reconciling love. In all the Semitic traditions, then, morality is central to
religious belief and entails respect and compassion for all personal life.
But what gives morality its driving force is a vision of a God of supreme
Goodness, whose nature is meant to be re?ected in human society and
whose ?nal goal is the trans?guration of the cosmos by a fully realized
personal unity with God.
Religion and Morality in Eastern Traditions
Buddhism and the renouncing traditions that largely originated in India
do not have any belief in a supreme Creator who issues moral commands
or who can establish a perfected community of love. Seeing that all life
involves impermanence and unease or su?ering (dukkha), the Buddha
located the cause of su?ering in attachment and inordinate desire. The
path of release that he taught, the Eightfold Way, is a path of meditation,
EBSCO : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) – printed on 4/3/2019 3:33 PM via UNIV OF EVANSVILLE
AN: 380247 ; Ward, Keith.; The Big Questions in Science and Religion
Account: s6491485.main.ehost
Copyright @ 2008. Templeton Press.
All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law.
194
can science provide an explanation for beliefs?
wisdom, and moral practice. Morality is an important part of the way
to liberation. It is not a matter of authoritative commands but a means
to liberation from sorrow.
It is not, however, a purely egoistic matter of ?nding release for oneself. Since a central doctrine of Buddhism is that of anatta, no-self, this
is not a path of release just for oneself. It is the path all sentient beings
must take to escape the wheel of rebirth. Some forms of Buddhist meditation concentrate the mind on the four noble qualities of compassion
for all sentient beings, equanimity, happiness in the joy of others, and
universal loving-kindness.
Coming to realize that there is no self, that nothing belongs to us, that
we do not truly own anything, we are released from egoism and possessiveness, and we can eventually pass beyond desire to a state in which
there is only compassion, wisdom and blissnirvana.
The Buddhist way is much more explicitly centered on meditation
and disciplined training of the mind than are the Semitic faiths. The
focus of such training is to achieve mindfulness and compassion. It is an
inner path of puri?cation rather than a code of social ethics. And it does
not expect a truly just society ever to exist since this world is essentially
a place where all sorts of destructive desires are worked out and ?nal
release entails leaving this world behind altogether. Things are getting
worse, and, for traditional Buddhist schools, only in monastic communities is there a real chance of ?nding Enlightenment.
Nevertheless, there are many forms of Buddhism, and not all of them
are world-renouncing. Especially in China and Japan, and quite recently
in India, forms of socially concerned Buddhism exist, which emphasize the role of lay Buddhists and the possibility of enlightened living
in ordinary society. Lay Buddhists have always been advised to follow
the Five Precepts. They are: Do not take life. Do not steal. Do not misuse sex. Do not lie. And do not take intoxicants. These are moral rules,
reminiscent of some of the Ten Commandments. But they are not given
by a God. Rather, they are rules that increase compassion, altruism, and
mindfulness and so may lead to a happier, more liberated life.
Buddhist ethics is rooted in a particular vision of human life and of
the nature of the human self. Humans are fettered by hatred, greed, and
ignorance, all of which inevitably lead to su?ering. The way to end suffering and to see things as they truly are is to renounce possessiveness
and clinging. Moral precepts outine the path toward release from sorrow. They are not absolute commands from some Supreme Authority
but sound advice for achieving true insight into what it is to ?ourish as
a human being.
Hinduism, unlike Buddhism, is explicitly theistic or even multitheistic.
EBSCO : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) – printed on 4/3/2019 3:33 PM via UNIV OF EVANSVILLE
AN: 380247 ; Ward, Keith.; The Big Questions in Science and Religion
Account: s6491485.main.ehost
Copyright @ 2008. Templeton Press.
All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law.
how does morality relate to religion?
195
What is characteristic of orthodox Hinduism is the key axiom that everything in the cosmos is part of Brahman, the absolute Spiritual Reality.
Brahman, even for the most nondualist traditions, takes the form of a
supreme personal Lord and can manifest in many di?erent divine forms
(the gods). The Supreme Lord is not a self-contained being, existing apart
from the cosmos. For most traditions, it unfolds into the cosmos, and
?nite souls are conditioned parts of its unconditioned reality.
The key perception of this main form of Hinduism is that all things
are parts of one Spiritual Reality, and that all human souls are, in some
sense, identical with Brahman. As in Buddhism, meditation is a main
path to spiritual discernment. But what is discerned is not that there is
no permanent self but that all things are identical with, or in union with,
the one Self of all.
This is clearly a di?erent interpretation than the one given by Buddhists, but it may seem more like a matter of emphasis than of sheer
contradiction. In both cases, the ordinary everyday personality is not a
permanent self. It is something to be transcended. In both cases, there is
a deeper reality of wisdom, compassion, and bliss, whether it is called a
Supreme Self or a state beyond personal description. And in both cases,
the spiritual path is one of passing beyond the everyday self to an awareness of that deeper realityin the case of Hinduism, of seeing that You
also are that [Self ].
The supreme spiritual perception for Hinduism is the unity of all
things in the Self. It is from this perception that moral conduct arises.
When you see that all things are one, you no longer separate yourself
as an isolated possessor of objects or ruler of other people. You will love
others as you love yourself because, in fact, you are all parts of the same
Self. As in Buddhism, there is transcendence of ego, and acts of compassion follow from discerning the spiritual unity of all things.
It may seem that rules of caste and custom dominate religious life in
India and that they dictate very hierarchical and traditional attitudes
toward society. But that is more a mark of preliterate rural culture than
of religious faith. There is a link between conservative and nationalist
attitudes and some forms of Hinduism, but, in such cases, it seems that
the nationalist and exclusive attitudes manipulate elements of the religion for their own ends. For belief that all things are parts of one Self of
wisdom and bliss and that di?erent people have di?erent roles to play in
relation to the Self (the basis of caste distinctions) does not license social
exclusion and discrimination. It ought to generate attitudes of social solidarity and compassion since it is only by compassionate action that one
can achieve release from the slavery of egoism. In the best spiritual teacherslike Gandhi and Ramakrishna, in recent timesit does.
EBSCO : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) – printed on 4/3/2019 3:33 PM via UNIV OF EVANSVILLE
AN: 380247 ; Ward, Keith.; The Big Questions in Science and Religion
Account: s6491485.main.ehost
Copyright @ 2008. Templeton Press.
All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law.
196
can science provide an explanation for beliefs?
Religion, like morality itself, can be used to bolster sets of values that
are oppressive to manythe systematic subjugation of women throughout recorded history is often justi?ed by appeal to moral values of family and sexual modesty. What is needed is not more morality but more
of a sort of morality that takes the ?ourishing of all beings seriously and
that opposes violence and oppression. Similarly, we do not need more
religion but more of a sort of religion that reinforces compassion for all
beings and nonviolence.
One would think that a religion that teaches the unity of all beings in
one supremely wise and blissful Self and that teaches ahimsa, respect
for all sentient beingsas a key virtue is just the sort of religion we
need. The sad fact is, however, that no moral, political, or religious system is beyond the possibility of corruption. Yet, in all the ambiguities
and tragedies of our world, it is important to hold onto some vision of
human nature that might give force and vivacity to moral action for universal human ?ourishing. When it functions authentically, religion does
this, but not by issuing authoritative moral rules or appealing to ancient
human customs. True religion seeks to move the heart to love virtue and
to encourage the sensitive personal perception of goodness. It does not,
and it certainly should not, encourage unquestioning and supine obedience to authority.
To a large extent, Confucian and Taoist attitudes toward morality,
though not overtly theistic, share this outlook. To live in accordance
with the Way of Heaven (Tian) or with the Way of Nature (Tao) is to
have insight into what it is to be a full human being. Just as a good knife
is a knife that cuts well, so a good human being is one who lives well,
who realizes distinctively human excellences. To live a good life is to live
in accordance with the Way of Heaven, a balanced and harmonious life
that ful?lls the distinctive potentialities of human nature and re?ects a
just perception of human possibilities.
The contrast between these attitudes and the Semitic emphasis on
morality as a matter of divine commands should not be overstressed. For
God, as the Supreme Good and the Creator of human nature, might be
expected to desire the ful?llment of the distinctive potentialities God
has placed in human lives. And, indeed, the main Christian tradition
in ethics, in?uenced by Aristotle, has based morality on natural law,
which is precisely the ful?llment of natural human inclinations because
they are created by God. Humanism, a concern for the ?ourishing of distinctively human excellences, is a shared moral perception between the
major religions. But religiously based humanism sees human ?ourishing
as involving conscious orientation to a more-than-human Spiritual Reality, whether that is conceived as God, nirvana, or the Way of Heaven.
EBSCO : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) – printed on 4/3/2019 3:33 PM via UNIV OF EVANSVILLE
AN: 380247 ; Ward, Keith.; The Big Questions in Science and Religion
Account: s6491485.main.ehost
Copyright @ 2008. Templeton Press.
All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law.
how does morality relate to religion?
197
There is an objective standard of goodness, perhaps realized in some
personal or suprapersonal form. Morality, according to such views, is
concerned not only with conduct but with the perception of objective
goodness, so moral practice is not so much a decision of the autonomous
will as a response to the discernment of an objective, more than humanly
invented, value. It is such discernment that lies at the heart of religious
faith, and it is that to which religious practice at its best points.
Morality and Sociobiology
Morality in general, it may seem, lies outside the province of the natural
sciences. The sciences are concerned with how things are, and morality
is concerned with how things ought to be. There is no ought from an
is was at one time almost an axiom of moral philosophers. So no moral
conclusions can be deduced from scienti?cally established facts. They
must have some other source.
In recent years, however, a new science, originally called sociobi…
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
