A Philosophical Analysis: Is Religion Truly Irrelevant for Morality?

This essay delves into the philosophical debate surrounding the relevance of religion to morality, exploring arguments from various philosophers such as Kant, Russell, and Aquinas. It examines the dependence of morality on religion, discussing concepts like moral nihilism and ethical theories. The...Read More

Running head: PHILOSOPHY
Essay on “Religion is irrelevant for morality”
Name of the student:
Name of the university:
Author note:

1
PHILOSOPHY
“Religion is irrelevant for morality”
Introduction
According to the perceptions of the people, morality comes from religion. Atheists
suffer from deep concerns regarding the presence of morality in their religious sentiments.
According to Christianity, the source of morality is religion. The contents of religion projects
their individual perceptions about sacred values (Wainwright, 2017). Etymological origin of
these aspects is the Bible, which is complex, as it consists of conflicting religious views. This
essay attempts to present the philosophical views on the relationship between religion and
morality.
Discussion
Dependence of morality on religion
Critics are divided on the reality behind the dependence of morality on religion.
According to Ivan Karamoazov, non-existence of God makes everything permissible. This
statement aligns with the assumptions related to moral nihilism. Ethical theories clarifies the
doubts of the readers regarding the development of autonomous thesis. According to these
theories, the source of morality is not with the God, the Creator (George, 2014). Along with
this, the theories also states that right and wrong actions depends on the will of God, the
Almighty. There are three ways in which independent actions can be exposed. This is in
alliance with the God’s will.
Philosophical views on religion and morality
Philosopher Kant negates any kind of difference between God and humanity. This is
for respecting and following the religious principles and guidelines. In his arguments, the
aspect of Categorical Imperative finds significant position. This concept involves the

2
PHILOSOPHY
perceptions regarding the good practices as the good will of the humans. As per the Ethical
Code of Conduct, God and immorality are the two important components (Rosemont, 2015).
The humans are ought to follow the principles and assess the impact on their personality, if
they can. Philosopher Kant opines that the humans need to reach moral perfection.
Countering this, this is not possible in terms of the obstacles, which aggravates the
complexities towards fulfilling the identified goals and objectives. According to the
principles of Creation, provision of universal justice assures the humans of the universality
within the aspect of Justice.
Pondering on the views of Bertrand Russell, the thought process of the humans is
entrapped within the concept of free will. Russell is also of the view that humans are at
liberty to create, live and expose commitment to the religious ideals. Meaning of life is the
perceptions, which the people attach to it. According to Allison, (2018), adherence to the
religious principles adds morality into the meaningful life. However, James Rachel believes
that when people worship God, they expose their autonomy. This is because, their identities
merge with God, the Supreme Power, which enhances their personal entity. Here,
contentment is an important aspect regarding the infantile nature of religious morality.
Authority within this morality is assistance in terms of exposing the religious sentiments
according to the postulates and the principles.
Religious morality
Philosophers like Kant and Russell belief in impartiality, which is a vital component
of moral reasoning. Golden rule in this aspect states the significance of consistency within the
actions, where reciprocation is the main theme. This recriprocation involves the cause and
effect, enhancing the aspect of judgmental rationality within decision-making for religious
sentiments (Phillips, 2016). Within this, mention can be made of the beliefs, which leads to

3
PHILOSOPHY
moral retribution. Here, thoughts related to recompensation are important in terms of
assessing the important of undertaking good or bad actions. Philosophers relate the aspect of
Karma or Punishment for indulging in bad actions. Punishments align with religious
sentiments, making the people aware of the dire consequences, which they might face upon
violating the moral values. These punishments compel the humans to seek ways for
overcoming these situations. This is the stage, when they are in need of assistance, guidance
and support from a strong and flexible source. In the opinions of Christian, (2015), God, the
Creator is that supreme source, which fulfils the need of providing proper guidance to the
humans regarding authentic religious guidelines. These guidelines is appropriate in terms of
safeguarding the humans from violating the moral and religious sentiments.
Cosmic justice
Summum Bonum or cosmic justice stands for the fact that happiness is proportional to
virtue. As per the arguments of philosopher Kant, presence of God is vital in terms of
increasing the possibility of aligning the proportion of virtue into happiness. On the other
hand, Aquinas is of the view that humans desire to attain happiness. This aligns with their
true nature. Along with this, he is also of the view that happiness is inversely proportional to
free will (Hanley, 2015). As a matter of specification, Aquinas enhanced the clarity about the
vision of reality. This belief includes the beatific vision of God, which is necessary if there is
compulsion towards fulfilling the requirements according to the nature of the religious
sentiments.
On the other hand, philosopher Thomas concentrated on the human desires and aims,
which does not necessitates the presence of God. However, the critics counter argue by
favouring the existence of God for fulfilment of the human desires and will. Countering this,
will is dependent of the needs of the humans. As per the arguments of Angier, (2016),

4
PHILOSOPHY
Humans are the creation of God, therefore, their wills and desires are controlled by God, the
Supreme Power. These aspects lay strong foundation for the existence of God. For example,
The Myth of Sisyphus projected the absurd meaning of life due to the absence of God.
Sisyphus failed to assert his will, which compelled him to let go of his desires. This absurdity
indicates the failure in terms of seeking remedies for the thwarted desires.
Religion enhances moral life
As per the arguments of philosophers James and Royce, presence of God results in
overpowering good over evil. This aspect nullifies the concept of individual struggles for
existence. Kantian views on reiteration of cosmic justice finds an important position in this
context in terms of the existence of God. Reality and validity of theistic values overpowers
the non-moral reasons. This aspect indicates the blessings, which God bestows on the
humans, enhancing the aspect of equality (Christian, 2015).
The Divine Command Theory states that an action is morally required to be just in
case if God commands us to do it and it is morally wrong if God forbids to do it (Danaher,
2017). Furthermore, it is also to note that an action is said to be permissible if God neither
forbids nor commands it. It has been widely claimed by many scholars that the moral
rightness is equal to the willed by God. One of such religious theories is that- God has created
nature as well as if laws of nature are in accordance with the plan of God. It is God who rules
everything and it is in his hands to conduct everything in this nature. The natural law is
universal and also it is the same for all the human beings. Such moral laws of nature could be
discovered by the human beings. Hence, these are the guidelines to the human moral action.
However, there are several problems in relation to this. The counter examples to
nature is disease and good self-interest. It gets confused with “is” and “ought”. It is also to
note in this context that the conflicts with the notion of nature and the concept proposed by

5
PHILOSOPHY
the science-not moral, purposive but it is effect and cause. Furthermore, as per Berlin (2017),
“the only purpose a man can have and also the only worthwhile thing a man can do is to
become as good a man as possible.” This is something that one could become by cultivating
his aesthetic, social, moral and cognitive powers. It is completely humanity at its best. Hence,
it is to state that the notion that religion is a precondition for the morality is deeply ingrained
and is widespread. There are many people who think or believe that morality comes from
their religion and the deeply religion ones often seen to be wondering how the atheists could
have morality at all.
Conclusion
The relationship in between morality and religion has long been highly debated. From
the above analysis, it has been concluded that in order to make significant progress, the
categories of morality and religion needs to be fractionated into a set of psychologically and
biologically cogent traits while revealing the cognitive foundations which constrain and
shape the relevant cultural variants. It is simply impossible for the people to be moral without
God or religion. The question of whether or not morality requires religion is both topical and
ancient.

6
PHILOSOPHY
References
Allison, H. E. (2018). Lessing and the Enlightenment: his philosophy of religion and its
relation to eighteenth-century thought. SUNY Press.
Angier, T. P. (2016). Either Kierkegaard/or Nietzsche: Moral philosophy in a new key.
Routledge.
Berlin, I. (2017). Two concepts of liberty. In Liberty Reader(pp. 33-57).
Christian Jr, W. A. (2015). Meaning and truth in religion (Vol. 2265). Princeton University
Press.
Danaher, J. (2017). In Defence of the Epistemological Objection to Divine Command
Theory. Sophia, 1-20.
George, R. P. (2014). The clash of orthodoxies: Law, religion, and morality in crisis. Open
Road Media.
Hanley, R. P. (2015). Adam Smith on the ‘Natural Principles of Religion’. Journal of
Scottish Philosophy, 13(1), 37-53.
Phillips, D. Z. (Ed.). (2016). Religion and morality. Springer.
Rosemont Jr, H. (2015). Against individualism: A Confucian rethinking of the foundations of
morality, politics, family, and religion. Lexington Books.
Wainwright, W. J. (2017). Religion and morality. Routledge.