Wide Sargasso Sea

Does Intent Matter In Our Actions and Why?

Ethical duties can also be obligated for other people. The doing of goods for other people can be ethically correct equally as much as the other two examples mentioned. Selflessness is apart of some religious ethical duties, rules and obligations. It is not always the right thing to do, sometimes, arguably, it is what it asked or expected of you.

All three headings (duty, rules, obligations) would be the supreme title for divine command ethics. They are coincide. One does not outweight the other. First, it is a unprecendented rule that has traditionally been respected and given. Next, the duty of that rule is acted upon because it is set and stone. Finally, the obligation becomes making the duty of the rule your first priority. No matter how difficult it may be, the oneness you create with that rule or duty sticks with you.

Kant was used a very spirited leader and speaker, yet he smoked tobacco. This could be an example of a obligation that went wrong. Tobacco, though not in scripture as bad, is not healthy for the body. One could say that rules were broken and duties were not exercised correctly. Divine Command ethics says that you follow verbatim.

Hume says that when we spoke of something as
morally good, what that really meant was that it appealed to us, to our senses. Well if that is so, then where does the Divine Command apply? The ethical standard is there but the Divine command portion is not implied meaning it is the person making the call, instead of God inside the person that's making the call.

Kant wanted to put a face with a name. His plan seemed as though he wanted to have an answer for every question. However, in Divine Command, there may not be. Though the examples of the Hebrews crossing the Red Sea, and the "right today" show that moral soundness could be there; it is not definite. The word "if" gives a hint as to why there is no right to everything. The Divine Command always has a...