Good
m (Wiki markup to avoid redirect-for-plural.) |
(various wikif; ital. word used as word throughout) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | '''Good''' has various meanings depending on one's perspective. [[ | + | '''Good''' has various meanings depending on one's perspective. [[Humanist]]s typically define ''good'' as any action or lack of action that causes an improvement in the life, health, happiness, or quality of humans or society. Many [[theist]]s define ''good'' as an action which is in accordance with [[God]]'s will. |
| − | ==The | + | ==The concept of "good" and God's will== |
| − | The theistic definition of good given above is problematic. If good is defined as whatever is in accordance with God's will then there is nothing to stop God from declaring murder and rape "good". If murder and | + | The theistic definition of ''good'' given above is problematic. If ''good'' is defined as whatever is in accordance with God's will then there is nothing to stop God from declaring [[murder]] and [[rape]] "good". If murder and rape are God's will then they must be good. Furthermore, what makes God's will automatically good? Does he get his definition of ''good'' from another source? If so, where does the source get their definition of ''good''? If not, then he's really just making up the definition of ''good'' as he goes along. |
This issue is further explored by the [[Euthyphro dilemma]]. | This issue is further explored by the [[Euthyphro dilemma]]. | ||
| − | See also | + | ==See also== |
| + | * [[Secular morality]] | ||
| − | [[Category: Morality]] | + | [[Category:Morality]] |
Revision as of 15:52, 3 April 2007
Good has various meanings depending on one's perspective. Humanists typically define good as any action or lack of action that causes an improvement in the life, health, happiness, or quality of humans or society. Many theists define good as an action which is in accordance with God's will.
The concept of "good" and God's will
The theistic definition of good given above is problematic. If good is defined as whatever is in accordance with God's will then there is nothing to stop God from declaring murder and rape "good". If murder and rape are God's will then they must be good. Furthermore, what makes God's will automatically good? Does he get his definition of good from another source? If so, where does the source get their definition of good? If not, then he's really just making up the definition of good as he goes along.
This issue is further explored by the Euthyphro dilemma.
