In "Morality and Religion" by Iris Murdoch the author, an English novelist, makes many points that writers can agree or disagree with. It talks about morality and religion and the philosophy behind the two. Murdoch's main argument is whether morality can exist without religion. He states his view of morality and religion by defining religion, explaining the differences between the two by questioning both, and analyzing virtue and duty. Comparing and contrasting morality and religion makes his vision ambivalent and complex, thus leaving it up to his readers to decide whether or not religion is necessary for morality. While some writers extend Murdoch's claims, other writers such as Aristotle complicate his view of religion and morality. Iris Murdoch begins her argument by stating that “there is only one way to acquire religion and that is by teaching it as a child” (363) . He sees religion as something that can only be achieved when one is a child. He then states that “people who embrace religion as adults are simply playing” (Murdoch 363). In stating this, the question of whether there can be morality without religion comes to mind. If religion is necessary to have morals and religion can only be acquired by children, this would mean that adults who are not raised in religion have no morals since they are just "playing". But if religion does not define whether people have morality, then this shows how religion is not necessary for someone to be moral. Murdoch basically says that people who embrace religion as adults don't truly know the meaning of faith and religion, but that doesn't necessarily mean they don't have any morals. One writer who complicates Murdoch's statement is Basil Mitchell, author...... center of paper ......activity is important to religion and it is people's duty to forgive in religion, so there is a relationship between both. Murdoch separates religion and duty, but Lauritzen complicates his view by explaining how duty derives from religion and forgiveness is an example of this. In “Morality and Religion” by Iris Murdoch the author questions whether or not religion is necessary for morality. He is very ambivalent with his answer as he explains the similarities and differences between morality and religion, but never specifically chooses a side. Many writers extend and complicate Murdoch's arguments, but only so that readers can better understand both concepts. This is significant because it helps readers better understand morality and religion, and they can decide for themselves whether religion is necessary for morality or whether morality is simply natural..
tags