Article Writing Homework Help

Create a 2 pages page paper that discusses should you always be moral. Should you always be moral and Section # of Should you always be moral The paper succinctly introduces the concept of morality in the light of studies by various philosophers and serves to clear the common misperceptions about the concerned concept in order to prove its usefulness in an individual’s life. The paper further elucidates the benefits of being moral at the level of individual as well as at the level of the society.

Introduction:

The question of being or not being moral stems from one’s perception of morality. As pointed out by Nietzsche, the concept has signified different meanings through different eras (Leiter: 2002, p. 77) but in a general frame of thought, morality refers to a measuring stick of good and evil. Although morality is coalesced with notions like duty, obligation and codes of conduct, Kant has considered morality to include self-imposed law which is free of one’s personal gains (Axinn: 1994, p. 39).

Adherence to Morality:

The concept of morality holds ambiguity in the light of contemporary debates that often debilitates its importance by considering it as an instrument of detachment from one’s self. According to Louden, it would be unjust to confine morality into a single ‘other-regarding’ aspect since a profound analysis of this concept proves a considerable coalescence with the ‘self-regarding’ aspect. Contrary to the contemporary beliefs that reckon self-importance as a merely anti-moral characteristic, the early Greek philosophers like Socrates gave primary importance to self-perfection thereby placing the welfare of others to a secondary level of morality. Similarly, Kant in the Doctrine of Virtue states that ‘if there were no duties to one, then there would be no duties whatsoever’. (Louden, 14 and 15). Such an understanding of morality provides a moderate approach for both the ‘self’ and ‘others’ thereby leaving no space for its abeyance.

Reasons for practicing Morality:

When encountered with the notion of adhering to the moral principles, what comes into question is the reason behind practicing morality – a question first made to Socrates by Thrasymachus (Parsons: 2001). For theists, morality comes as an idea hybridized with religion having a specific motive of salvation behind its practice. When shaped into the religious frame, the moral values differ from one religion to the other.

Plato in his ‘Republic’ draws comparison of morality with different professions in terms of their usefulness. Similar to the skills of craftsmen, there should be an art of living determined in the light of its final destination. Only such an art can enable man to distinct morality as the most valuable possession (Cordford: 1945, p.08).

Contrary to the theists, the reason left for agonists and atheists is significantly their survival in the society. According to Drange, the basic reason behind adopting morality is ‘the sake of expediency’. To be expedient is to be pleasant towards others and to avoid their anger thereby benefiting one’s own position ((1998). The moral attitudes one exhibits towards others determine their future prospects. For instance, an entrepreneur with positive reputation is more likely to attract the larger bodies of clientele. This material success eventually adds to one’s complacence with life.

In terms of moral code of conduct prevalent in a particular state, one who abides by such rules not only serves as a positive moiety of the nation but also avoids the risks of legal comeuppance in case of laws’ violation. On a more general level, the moral obligations and their adherence in a particular society shows a consensus among its members thereby lessening the chances of intra-communal conflicts and increasing the prospects of its growth since humans are attracted to societies practicing order and moral justice (Rae: 2000, p.11).

Conclusion:

Keeping in view the above presented benefits and a profound analysis of morality, it is evident that morality when practiced benefits at both the individual and the communal level. Once the famously held misconception about morality to have ignored the ‘self’ is removed, the biggest impediment in its practice is also vanished thereby leaving no negative implications on personal and social life of the individuals.

References:

1. Axinn, S. (1994). The Logic of Hope: Extensions of Kant’s View of Religion. USA: Rodopi.

2. Cornford, F.M. (1945). The Republic of Plato. London: Oxford University Press.

3. Leiter, B. (2002). Philosophy Guidebook to Nietzsche on Morality. London: Routledge.

4. Louden, R.B. (1992). Morality and Moral Theory: A Reappraisal and Reaffirmation. New York: Oxford University Press.

Rae, S. B. (2000). Moral Choices: An Introduction to Ethics. USA: Zondervan

5. Drange, T. M. (1998). Why Be Moral Retrieved March 12, 2008, from The Secular Web: http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/theodore_drange/whymoral.html

6. Parsons, K. M. (2001). Why Be Moral A Dilemma for Nontheists Retrieved March 12, 2008, from The Secular Web: http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/keith_parsons/whymoral.