It’s been extremely interesting over the last semester as I have studied different ethical theories in my Ethics class. It seems that all of these theories at some point seem to break down. Each one attempts to explain morality by some abstract scale in saying the most moral thing is that which creates the most happiness, or that which creates the most good, still ot
hers that the most moral thing is that which was done with the best intentions. The interesting thing is that as one studies all of these they all break down at one point to admitting that there is some standard to which they came up with their guidelines in the first place that they cannot explain. they see that many times the right act produces the most happiness and then conclude that the right act must produce the most happiness. But they have stepped ahead in reasoning forgetting how they concluded in the first place that happiness is a sign of right action. Or for the others that good intentions are also a sign of right action, or that the good results a sign a right action. They instead leapfrog over this saying an action is right because it produces goodness or happiness. They have attempted to cover up the fact that their theories all admit that an action is not right or justified to be right because of these consequences.
What is more interesting is that when the cover is taken of and one admits that these moral standards are something built into each of us there remains only one conclusion. If in fact we all have a standard of moral beliefs built into us then there must be something that put it there. If such a power that could place these beliefs in us did not exist there lives no reasonable explanation for why such a consistent standard of morality exists in the world. It seems in the end our convictions of morality prove that a god, or some sort of supernatural power must exist. A rather staggering conclusion I know.