Home › Forums › Decaffeinated Coffee › Morals In Religion › Reply To: Morals In Religion
About a year ago after thinking about this paradox called the Euthyphro dilemma, I came to a satisfying solution. Firstly we’ll have to define ethics or morals. “Good and Bad” have two definitions, 1: usefulness; as in a ‘good’ car is up and running, looks nice, has ac… as apposed to a ‘bad’ car that is broken. 2: in a moral sense the difference between Good (pious) and Evil.
Our dilemma is obviously regarding the second definition between pious and evil.
I think the key over here is to realize that piousness and evilness do not exist as an independent objective reality, rather they are confined to a very specific equation. Namely, to the area of free will. That is why animals that do not have free will it cannot be called pious or evil.
As G-d has the ultimate free will He created good (and its flip side as a necessary by product, as is clearly stated in navi) and instructed us (Torah) on what choices we should make with our free will. At the same time he also instilled with us a moral compass which if unadulterated lines up to the rules of the Torah. (This may be a meaning in Hashem, the Torah and Yisrael are one and the same.)
Also we know the Torah is the blueprint for the world and therefore if we see in the world good behaviors in animals that G-d established, moral compasses would lead us understand that that is the choices Hashem would want us to choose.
These are deep concepts, but hopefully understandable if we will delve into them.