Ethics and Morality Issues - Essay Example

Ethic and Morality Nietzsche (1844-1900) was a Philosopher known for his radical critics on social laws, religion, and honourables. In his thoughts, Nietzsche believed that morality is anti-nature. As defined by Friedrich (404), anti-nature describes the act of allowing someone to force their beliefs or morals onto you. According to Nietzsche, all human beings have desires that dictate what they do and not. These desires are given by nature and they define who an individual is and why he/she behaves in a certain way. The argument of Nietzsche is characterized by the fact that morality and religion alter the human nature. To fully define the anti-nature concept, Nietzsche makes it clear that when one denies his own passion, then he is denying the reality. To him, the greatest and best moralities are those, which accommodate nature while the weakest are those who deny it. Particular, the philosopher state that an individual should have a free will to choose what he or she wants and nothing should control or trigger him to do something. In his concept of morality as anti-nature, Nietzsche stated how the extensiveness of morality and religion alter the human nature. Even though many people believe that religion provides a sense of direction in life, the philosopher strongly disagreed. According to him, following a religion means ignoring the nature of humanity since an individual is forced to act in a certain way that pleases the Maker. I disagree with Nietzsche since his argument opposes the religion and thus, discourages most Christians from reading. This essay supports Irish Murdoch’s philosophy since he captivates readers’ attention with her adequate knowledge in literature and philosophy. Although both Nietzsche and Murdoch deal with the concept of morality in a similar way, there are differences on how the two present their argument. Nietzsche based his argument on a naturalistic perspective of how religion contradicts how humanity is responsible for controlling their given passions and nature. However, Murdoch includes religion in the equation of morality. He based his argument on morality without and with God thus allowing readers to understand his point of views (Jacobus 55). Unlike Nietzsche, Murdoch engages other people’s philosophies in great depth and further incorporates them in her discussion. Nietzsche uses deists’ intellectuals and gives no or little credibility to their experiences and beliefs. While researchers, scholars, and deists can think about other philosophers’ argument on the subject while reading Murdoch argument, Murdoch creates a platform where readers can decline or accept her argument at any point. Based on how Murdoch presents her arguments, readers can think that the author has not yet concluded her argument but given her readers a free will to choose what they believe. Nietzsche does not take a psychological path to examine the virtue of duty or responsibility (Friedrich 405). Although both Murdoch and Nietzsche derive their beliefs about morality from nature, Nietzsche quoted that “each individual has the duty to carry out his passions. Just as modern moral philosophers were rediscovering the virtues, social psychologists were uncovering evidence of the church being hostile to human nature ” (Friedrich 404). The moralities of being weak in life are discussed in the religious cloak and in this case, Nietzsche believes that the church is hostile to human nature. From Nietzsche’s argument, one can derive the fact that the greatest moralities are those that embrace nature while the weakest deny it. At this point, Nietzsche provides readers with a system that can benefit human beings in life especially on love and hostility. However, Murdoch takes a psychological path and examines the virtue of responsibility or duty. At this point, Murdoch believes that fulfilling one’s duty towards nations, institutions, and others is virtuous deed outside religion. Murdoch continues to argue that dutifulness is in our human nature. It is crucial to note that, Murdoch is not against religion rather provides his argument in a way that readers understand how human beings have duties to make decisions and be the best they can. Nietzsche makes readers feel that Christians are hypocrites since many embrace the need to change their human nature to fulfil the religion’s doctrines. From this, it is evident that Nietzsche discourages most Christians from reading his argument as many would be left feeling guilt and hopeless. The argument of Nietzsche is that, church or religion is hostile to human nature since it provides rooms for people to approve different doctrines about life, thus denying human beings the privilege to enjoy nature. Nietzsche’s argument persuade his readers that he supports people accepting their desires, instead of following religion’s doctrines that silence human beings’ passions (Jacobus 67). Murdoch branches his argument in a different point of view. For instance, he provides readers with the fact that art pushes human beings into metaphysical world, which then make human beings to desire to be like God. The realization of art makes human beings to desire for redemption and desire to fix or hold to certain principles that make them better in the society. This contradicts Nietzsche’s argument since he denies that any sense of redemption happens when human beings ignore their nature desires and instead hold themselves to standards they must achieve. Murdoch states that religion increases morality since it instil a conviction and belief in a person especially they are in an uncontrolled state. He proposes that the church or religion moulds someone to be of purpose and fulfil his set goals and dreams. Human beings can only reach their potential if they ignore their human desires and embrace the ideals of their conviction and personal beliefs about life. According to Murdoch, religion instils the conviction and desire to live upright and destroy the inner passion to sin. Religion helps human beings to fulfil and comply with the ethics set by government, state, or any institution. This contradicts Nietzsche philosophy that human passions determine morality. Nietzsche believed that religion particularly “Christianity” has become the enemy of nature and life. The Church has made its followers into weak and close minded humans. Nietzsche argued that religion increases the concept of anti-natural morality, which in turn damages human development. While analyzing the two philosophers, I believe that Irish Murdoch has stronger views on morality. Murdoch believes that there is right and wrong and it is not based on an individual’s perspective. Nietzsche has no right to discredit and discourage churches from teaching what is upright, but rather gives human beings a chance to be who they want to be in nature. To some extent, Nietzsche contradicts his argument since he fails to recognize that the church or clergyman could be following his passion to see others living in accordance with God’s principles. Additionally, the clergyman may also be following his passion to see other not being consumed of their passion. Murdoch presents his arguments in such a way that, her audience understand that there is right and wrong. The convictions that one has determines the decision that one makes to perform the right or wrong deed. With this, Murdoch embraces religion as a strong approach that convicts people to turn away from their sins and wrongdoings and do what is right in the nation, state, or community. From the ongoing discussion, this essay supports Murdoch’s argument since it supports how human beings have their passions to achieve the best in nature. Although Nietzsche creates insights on humanity, he denies the objective of moral values. He believes that every individual has the duty to determine if they are being moral or immoral. According to Murdoch, nature plays a crucial role on how one behaves and reacts to different situations. Murdoch takes into account the account of other philosophers such as Michael Gazzaniga who believed that religion plays a significant in the world (Gazzaniga and Reuter 88). In his thoughts, Gazzaniga believed that world is dominated by human beings who hold religious beliefs. According to him, religion is good and can only contradict nature when individuals who hols religious beliefs want the religion to hold them as well. Murdoch teachings and arguments attract a wide number of people who are Christians and not Christians. Murdoch gives little credibility on her experiences and beliefs, but rather compiles her facts in a way that researchers, scholars, and deists cannot reject her argument. Works Cited Friedrich, Nietzsche. The Selected Writings of Friedrich Nietzsche. Lanham: Start Publishing LLC, 2013. Internet resource. Gazzaniga, Michael S, and Reuter, Patricia A. The Cognitive Neuroscience of Mind: A Tribute to Michael S. Gazzaniga. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 2010. Print. Jacobus, Lee A. A World of Ideas: Essential Readings for College Writers. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2002. Print. Read More