Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
The question of human purposes has always been under the investigation of philosophical doctrines. Through the prism of understanding such an issue from different angles, it is possible to define a way of harvesting proper aims. Below, a discussion on the essence of human purposes in the framework of utilitarianism, monotheism, and Descartes’s quest for certainty will be provided.
Utilitarianism is usually understood as the most influential and earliest developed version of consequentialism. The latter can be viewed as normative ethics, in which the moral correctness of an action is determined by the nature of its consequences (Komter, 2007). The general structure of utilitarianism as a normative program is defined by the following interrelated statements. First, there is a single good that matters morally. This is a benefit, or usefulness, which can be identified with happiness, pleasure, well-being, the satisfaction of desires, or the realization of the interests of individuals. Secondly, this good is measurable and subject to summation (aggregation). The summation of utility can be carried out at the level of an individual or at the level of groups of different sizes. This includes the whole of humanity or the totality of sentient (more broadly, living) beings. Accordingly, on the basis of the analysis of increments of utility and its losses, a certain final index relating to an individual or a set of individuals at a certain point in time can be fixed.
According to the utilitarian doctrine, an increase in total utility makes the world a better place. Therefore, in the context of human goals, in choosing between alternative actions available for performance or norm systems that claim to be recognized, the moral agent must proceed from which of them provide the greatest increase in the summed utility (Komter, 2007). Utilitarianism suggests that human ends can and should be formulated in terms of the degree of good that their realization entails.
Descartes sees the first and initial certainty of any philosophy in the certainty of consciousness—thinking. The demand that it should come only from thinking as such – everything must be doubted. Thus, he makes the very rejection of all definitions the first condition of philosophy (Gillespie, 2006). It acts as a skepticism that destroys imaginary certainties in order to find the only real primary certainty. In the context of a person’s goal, human consciousness should strive to determine the highest virtues on its own. Here, Descartes’ concept of generosity plays a significant role.
Generosity is a human quality or virtue by which each person, as the subject of action, is in harmony with all other people. It is a form of absolute reciprocity, which is a synthesis of singularity and universality. It allows everyone to be truly different from everyone else, providing an opportunity for a fair exchange of values. Generosity does not look for support in another, does not expect support from them, and does not require submission (Gillespie, 2006). It assumes that the Other is the same as I, that he does not need me, does not count on me, does not depend on me.
It is obvious that in this recognition of the equality of the Other there is nothing of beautiful-hearted altruism. On the contrary, it is a kind of heroism of the sovereign Self, for which the Other is not necessarily a friend, but, under the right conditions, an equal adversary. Generosity is not an innate idea, but a virtue achieved by individual will, knowledge, and reason that skeptically defines the postulates. It is due to the proper use of free will, which, without detracting from the freedom of other people, makes a person, if not equal, then like God. The nature and purpose of people are not in nature, but in the heroic search for harmony between private desires and true dignity, which is expressed in generosity – the ability to give more than circumstances require.
The philosophy of monotheism is founded on the idea of believing in only one God. A significant representative of such an approach is Hermann Cohen and his concept of ethical monotheism. The main characteristics of God in Cohen’s philosophy of religion are uniqueness and justice, and in the end – the correlation between God and humans; religion is the connection between man and God (Novak, 1981). Uniqueness characterizes the absolute transcendence of God in relation to the world and man. According to Cohen, religion can and should be inscribed in an idealistic philosophical system, in its theoretical part. The main instrument of such inscribing for him is the interpretation of God as an idea. God is not the substantial creator of the world, but as an idea, there is the content of truth. God is the keystone in the building of the human mind, the idea of this mind.
There can be no contradiction between God and moral reason. The moral law must and can be the law of God without ceasing to be the law of reason. According to Cohen, given that monotheism involves an ethical dimension, it manifests itself prophetic messianism. For Cohen, messianism is the domination of good on earth (Novak, 1981). Thus, prophetic messianism is an expression of the belief that humanity is advancing towards the realization of ideal ethical laws.
To conclude, the above discussion was dedicated to the issue of a human’s purpose. The three philosophic doctrines were implied to explore this theme – monotheism, utilitarianism, and Descartes’s quest for certainty. It was found that people’s aims should always be founded on ethical laws, reason, and common good. Humanity’s virtues can only be realized if the mentioned conditions will be met – it shows an exact extent of correlation between the mentioned concepts in this vein.
References
Gillespie, A. (2006). Descartes’ demon: A dialogical analysis of meditations on first philosophy.Theory & Psychology, 16(6), 761–781. Web.
Komter, A. (2007). Gifts and social relations: The mechanisms of reciprocity.International Sociology, 22(1), 93–107. Web.
Novak, D. (1981). Universal moral law in the theology of Hermann Cohen. Modern Judaism, 1(1), 101–117. Web.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.