“Higher Pleasures”

I don’t know if one can classify “higher pleasures” better than lower pleasures. According to Mills, pleasure is linked with happiness. If a lower pleasure happens to make an individual equally as happy as a quote on quote higher pleasure, I do not see how one can measure the two. For example, money may be the highest pleasure for someone whereas friendship may be the most important pleasure to another person. Therefore, I feel it is impossible to say that “higher pleasures” are better than lower pleasures because each individual is different and their perspectives on pleasures and happiness varies.

Rational God

There is a difference between performing a moral act and acting moral. Every individual has a conscience that tries to guide them towards morality, but not all individuals listen. God has given us that freedom of choice to follow our morals or not to. I believe in a moral God and that that in turn leads him to be rational. I do not think that God determines the paths that people follow nor do I think that he saves or kills. God is a spiritual being there to guide people in the right direction. If people veer off that is a reflection of their own beliefs. God is similar to a referee. He has control of things but is always fair no matter the situation. He cannot favor any single person nor punish them. He leaves individuals the choice to do what they like and let their actions have their own consequences. That is the true meaning of being rational.

Utilitarianism

This is an interesting question. To what extent are we morally responsible for the outcomes of our actions. I feel that the outcome of an act is equally as important as their intentions. Individuals are only morally responsible for the outcomes of actions that they can control. For example, if I happen to save someone’s life by pushing them out of the way of a car and by doing so the car hits a dog running across the street I do not feel I am morally responsible for that. My intentions were morally good and although the outcome did not turn out the way I would have liked, my actions are still moral. Individuals can only be morally responsible for what they can control and what they know. The Utilitarian theory says that an action is morally good if it increases overall happiness and bad if it decreases overall happiness. I do not completely agree with this. According to this theory a billionaire donating a million dollars to charity would be a stronger act of morality than a poor person donating a dollar. I feel that both acts are equally as moral due to the circumstances.

Divine Command Theory

Divine Command Theory means that good things in the world are good because God said they are. There is no rationale behind this theory, simply that whatever God says must be the truth. This statement can draw questions for example, say that God says it is moral to steal. According to this theory, that would mean that if one were to steal it would be considered moral because God commanded that. If this theory were to be deemed false, it would not take away any of the omnipotency of God, it would only imply that morals good and bad are created through religion and the power of God, that infallable being only strengthens those morals and gives people something to believe in. Saying that this theory is false does not weaken God’s power, I just feel that one should not conclude that since God said something is moral it makes that moral. People should have their own moral values and relate them to what God says.

Hello world!

Welcome to WordPress.com. This is your first post. Edit or delete it and start blogging!