RELIGION AND ETHICS

• Many people who consider themselves "religious" assume that it

is the teachings of their own religion that define what is trul
y "right" or "wrong," "good" or "bad.
• The question of the proper relationship between religion and
ethics, therefore, is one that demands philosophical exploration.
There are many different religions in the world. Christianity, Islam,
Hinduism, and Buddhism are four of the largest religious groups
in the world today, based on population.
RELIGION AND ETHICS
• The Philippines is predominantly Roman Catholic, yet
many other religions continue to flourish in the
archipelago.
• Beyond all the differences, however, religion in essence
represents a group's ultimate, most fundamental
concerns regarding their existence.
RELIGION AND ETHICS
• For followers of a particular religion, the ultimate
meaning of their existence, as well as the existence of
the whole of reality, is found in the beliefs of that religion.
• Therefore, the question of morality for many religious
followers is reduced to following the teachings of their
own religion. Many questions arise from this assertion.
This is where a philosophical study of ethics enters.
RELIGION AND ETHICS
• Many religious followers assume that what their religion teaches
can be found either in their sacred scripture (e.g., the Bible for
Christians, the Qur'an for Muslims) or body of writings (e.g., the
Vedas, including the Upanishads, and other texts for Hindus; the
Tao Te Ching, Chuang-tzu, and other Taoist classics for Taoists)
or in other forms (other than written texts) of preaching that their
leaders had promulgated and become part of their traditions.
RELIGION AND ETHICS
• A critical, philosophical question that can be asked, vis-à-vis
ethics, is "What exactly does sacred scripture (or religious
teaching) command?" This is a question of interpretation since
even the same passage from a particular religious tradition
• (e.g., "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth” (Genesis 21:24))
can have many different interpretations from religious teachers
even from within the same tradition.
 RELIGION AND ETHICS
Based on what Ramon C. Reyes says concerning an individual's cross-
points, one can see that the reading or interpretation of a particular
passage or text is the product of an individual's embodiment and
historicity, and on the other hand, her existential ideal.
• This does not mean that religious teaching is relative to the individual's
particular situation (implying no objective and universal truth about the
matter) but that any reading or interpretation has a historical
particularity affected by the situatedness of the reader This implies that
the moral agent in question must still, in full responsibility, challenge
herself to understand using her own powers of rationality, but with full
recognition of her own situatedness, what her religious authorities claim
their religion teaches.
 RELIGION AND ETHICS
Second, one must determine what justifies the claim of a particular religious
teaching when it commands its followers on what they ought to do (whether in
general or in specific situations).
• Relevant to this is Plato's philosophical question in his dialogue Euthyphro,
which was mentioned in an earlier unit: "Is it holy only because it is loved by the
gods, or is it holy in itself and that is why it is loved by the gods? Philosophers
have modified this question into a moral version: When something is morally
good," is it because it is good in itself and that is why God commands it. or is it
good because God simply says so? If a particular preacher teaches her
followers to do something because it is what (for example) their sacred
 RELIGION AND ETHICS
• scripture says, a critical-minded follower might ask for
reasons as to why sacred scripture says that if the preacher
simply responds that is what is written in sacred scripture,' that
is tantamount to telling the follower to stop asking questions
and simply follow.
• Here, the critical-minded follower might find herself in an
unsatisfying impasse. History reveals that there were people
who twisted religious teaching that brought harm to their
followers and to others.
 RELIGION AND ETHICS
• scripture says, a critical-minded follower might ask for
reasons as to why sacred scripture says that if the preacher
simply responds that is what is written in sacred scripture,' that
is tantamount to telling the follower to stop asking questions
and simply follow.
• Here, the critical-minded follower might find herself in an
unsatisfying impasse. History reveals that there were people
who twisted religious teaching that brought harm to their
followers and to others.
 RELIGION AND ETHICS
• An example is the Crusades in the European Middle Ages.
European Christians, who followed their religious leaders
teaching, massacred Muslims, Jews, and even fellow Christians
to recapture the Holy City of Jerusalem from these so-called
heathens.
• A contemporary example is when terrorists who are religious
extremists use religion to justify acts of violence they perform
on fellow human beings.
 RELIGION AND ETHICS
• The problem here is not that religion misleads people, the problem is
that too many people perform heinous acts simply because they
assumed they were following the teachings of their supposed religion
without stopping to think whether these actions are harmful. The
philosophical minded individual therefore is tasked to be critical even
of her own set of beliefs and practices, and to not simply follow for the
sake of blind obedience.
 RELIGION AND ETHICS
• These critical questions about one's culture and religious
beliefs show us the need for maturity or growth in one's
morality, both in terms of intellect and character The
responsible moral agent then is one who does not blindly
follow externally imposed rules, but one who has a well-
developed "feel" for making informed moral decisions. The
following section will discuss this need for developing one's felt
for morality.