Theory of Knowledge - Course Companion for Students Marija Uzunova Dang Arvin Singh Uzunov Dang

or without religion, good people can behave well
With
bad people can do evil; but for good people to do
and
religion necessary for morality? To claim
Is
would be to suggest that humans lack
so
moral compass, that in the absence of
a
authority about right and wrong, and
divine
fear of judgment and punishment, we
without
behave in immoral ways. To claim the
would
that humans do have
oppositewouldmean
like a moral compass, independent of
something
teaching and belief, and we would need
religious
explain where that capacity comesfrom.
to
critics of religion—especially those who
Some
as anti-theists—echo the sentiments
identify
by Weinberg above. They cite
expressed
where religion has been used to justify
examples
acts of terrorism, and racial and sexual
slavery,
to show that it is not uncommon for
oppression,
to behave immorally while claiming to
people
God on their side.
have
approach to answering the question of
One
morality requires religion is to consider
whether
societies have become more or less
whether
as religiosity has declined. A common
moral
is that in contemporary societies
observation
religion has retreated, morality has
where
because social institutions and humanist
not,
have filled that space. Indeed, many
traditions
ideas have flourished despite fewer
moral
believing inGod. But this argument fails
people
distinguish causation from correlation; it may
to
be that a rising tide of economic wellbeing
well
the absence of religion, or the guidance
In
God, what systems might we have for
of
human behaviour? A few alternatives
guiding
One example is consequentialism,
apply.
asserts that it is the consequences of
which
conduct that form the basis for moral
one’s
causes a decline in religion and a
simultaneously
in a civic and humanist ethos, with no causal
rise
if belief in God is diminishing,
Even
can offer a moral imagination that
religion
supernatural but nonetheless relevant to
is
This is the idea of being religious
humanity.
to believe but to wonder. Religious fables,
not
and morals speak to how humankind
stories
and navigates the world, teaching
imagines
about us—covering such varied topics as
us
war, leadership, family, economics, lawmaking
food,
andpolitics.
ancestors acknowledged doubt while
“Our
faith. We moderns are drawn to
practicing
(a) To what extent are doubt and faith
1.
exclusive positions in
mutually
this mutual exclusivity apply in
Does
case of other AOKs?
the
What types of knowledge, across TOK,
2.
assumptions and acts of faith to
require
Is there a type of knowledge that is
3.
when questioned, and should
destroyed
protected against questioning? If so,
be
should be allowed to decide what
who
knowledge is, and what are the
that
for governance, human
implications
The emphasis on consequences
judgments.
that laws, guidelines and rules are
means
that is, they can be violated if the
secondary;
justify it. This is in contrast to
consequences
ethics which put rules, behaviour
deontological
duty as central. The moral philosopher
and
IV. Ethics
IV. Ethics
IV.2 Morality and religion
mechanism between the two.
evil—that takes religion.
(Weinberg 1999)
For discussion
What is the role of doubt in religious
knowledge and morality?
faith while practicing doubt.” (Gopnik 2015)
religious knowledge?
(b)
be valid?
rights and politics?
Box 6.2: Secular alternatives to religious ethics
163