Bingöl Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi

Abstract

We know of all kinds of attempts to justify morality in history. The classifications that arise are in shapes according to their point of view. These are sequences; The blissful morality (virtue / pleasure / pain), utilitarian morality (utilitarian) and prescriptive morality (deontologist). These theories are mostly human-centred theories. When it comes to euphoric morality, the body has an understanding based on its pleasures or pains. Utilitarian morality; takes care of the beneficial object. He arrives at the proposition that "what is beneficial to man is moral." While the determinacy of the law is taken as a basis in the prescriptive moral understanding, the results of the action are not taken. However, it is necessary to act from a "transcendental" point above these when it comes to religious morality. Because it is thought that the law maker of religious morality is God. The basis of moral action is divine. In this respect, the mode of existence of religious morality is vertical. This indicates the optimum feature of religious morality. Because its source is in a superhuman place. Therefore, a kind of reductionist return can be made to moral theories that are built solely on human beings. Virtue, pleasure or pain; utility or rule may be examples of these. Religious morality, on the other hand, can be seen as superior because it stems from the limits of the human mind. This brings out the view that religious morality is stronger and more effective. However, if those who apply religious morality to their lives do not have the will, religious morality remains on paper. This resource will consider the possibility of the autonomy of religious morality.