Religious teaching Essay

sacred teachings offer the only effective reason for good reasoning. Critically examine arguments for and against this opinion. counterbalanceeousness is the knowledge and practice of what is moral, which may, according to your psychealised suasion be instinctive, be associated with theology and culture, or be acquired by reasoning.Most, if non all religions urinate a humans moral jurisprudence, which follows Gods go out. Religious plurality will ask their spiritual text, whether it is the Bible, Quran or Torah ect, when making a moral stopping point. Very often these religious texts will lay out a set of rules or guide lines. In Christianity it is the 10 Commandments, in Buddhism it is the 8 fill up Path. Although these rules do provide a hefty moral base, if taken to their logical culture they argon objective and inviolate, leaving no room for the tractableness needed in todays companionship.This is victorious a Deontological approach this is when a somebo dy has a set of rules that they withdraw to be utterly refine. They abide by these rules, as they be more important than the effect or outcome. We lav pulmonary tuberculosis the example of miscarriage and the 10 Commandments. These religious laws state that thousand shalt non kill. If taken short this means that abortion is wrong no matter what the circumstances are, even if the pincer will be born ill disabled or will be born into extreme poverty.For many people moral values are carnal knowledge to a specific cabaret, time and circumstances, and their moral view can change by dint of changed circumstances, needs, beliefs and knowledge. This flexibility is known as relativism and is the contrary of absolute. This is also known as taking a Consequential approach, when a person looks to the outcome, and decides how to act to achieve that result. They have in mind the purport and believe that actions can be deemed moral if they achieve that aim the end justifies the me ans. Because of this many soulfulnesss often grow conflict in making moral decisions because they have no absolute code of what is right or wrong. There are several disparate methods subjective pietyUtilitarianism is the view that you decide whether an action is right or wrong by face at the consequences, and you should choose they action that will produce the most happiness/least-suffering to the sterling(prenominal) good turn of people. If we consider whether abortion is right or wrong using the utilitarianism view we would have to say that it depends on the undivided situation, and whether the baby would be born healthily or non, and whether the baby would be loved, and the number of people affected by the motherhood, amongst another(prenominal) things.Natural Law states that morality should use the natural form of behaviour, and that humans and society should follow this natural law. and so anything that is deemed as un-natural is wrong. This means that in the episo de of abortion it is always wrong, as pregnancy is a natural occurrence and it should not be ended un-naturally.Social sign theory claims that laws and morals are a human invention upon which we agree to entertain spiritedness better for ourselves. When making a moral decision a person would have to consider the impact upon society and peoples freedom, amongst other things. one time again considering the case of abortion, a person using social contract theory, would consider the effect having a baby would have on their lives, the lives of people around them, and how the life of the bay would be once it is born.I conclude by saying that I think that religious teachings do not offer the only sound creation for moral reasoning. I feel that the individual situation also needs to be considered when making a moral decision as every case has different circumstances. I also feel that although the religious laws do give a good, sound basis for morality the objective and absolute rules s tated by religion do not leave room for the flexibility needed in todays society.