Critical Analysis Paper # 3
Analysis of “Religion Gives Meaning to Life,” by Louis P. Pojman
Introduction:
In this article, “Religion Gives Meaning to Life,” Louis P. Pojman believes that religion, but mainly a theistic religion gives purpose and meaning to life. Pojman feels that, since people cannot prove that theism is true or not true, then therefore, people should live like theism is true. A world with theism, living life following a higher being would be a better world than living a life of self-governing, autonomy. Lastly, Pojman believes that living in autonomy is not really affected by having a religion or faith but instead religion may help everyone’s autonomy because they will have more purpose for their personal goals. On page …show more content…
They would have no reason to help and care for others because their main priority would be themselves. This will allow people to do good things for others but also this would allow people to kill, steal and destroy whatever and whoever they want without any consequences. This correlates with one of Pojman’s example situations about living in autonomy and living with theism. Situation A is about people being as free as possible but they are in a large room with poisoned gas that is slowly filling the room. Although they still have their freedom, they will die sooner. This shows that people will be able to do what they desire but slowly poverty, crime, and death will increase because there is no moral guidance nor boundaries on what the people should. That is why if secularism was true and theism was false, life would possibly be better with a higher …show more content…
Autonomy allows people to gain their own personal goals, yet it can lead to destruction and chaos. Majority of the people would not want to live in poverty or always having to keep their guards up because it would be easy for anyone to steal or try to kill them for things of great expense or less. Freedom is great but not at expense of losing one’s life. On the contrary, living in a theistic life, people have a meaning to why they are on earth because it is given or shown to by their higher being with a good promised ending for everyone. In order to get this great promise from their higher being, a person will to give up some of their freedom, which would include things that would harm themselves or others. There is also the comfort in knowing that God loves and cares for all people and has a plan for their lives. This is not only good morally but good for the community of people, to actually help one another to achieve personal goals together. This helps prevents people from wanting to do bad or evil things to get what they want and makes it safer for everyone. This also correlates with Pojman’s other example of situations living with theism or autonomy. In situation B, Pojman discusses having a purpose and giving up a little freedom in order to eliminate great sufferings in the world. A theistic world would be better for everyone spiritually and
Analysis of “Religion Gives Meaning to Life,” by Louis P. Pojman
Introduction:
In this article, “Religion Gives Meaning to Life,” Louis P. Pojman believes that religion, but mainly a theistic religion gives purpose and meaning to life. Pojman feels that, since people cannot prove that theism is true or not true, then therefore, people should live like theism is true. A world with theism, living life following a higher being would be a better world than living a life of self-governing, autonomy. Lastly, Pojman believes that living in autonomy is not really affected by having a religion or faith but instead religion may help everyone’s autonomy because they will have more purpose for their personal goals. On page …show more content…
They would have no reason to help and care for others because their main priority would be themselves. This will allow people to do good things for others but also this would allow people to kill, steal and destroy whatever and whoever they want without any consequences. This correlates with one of Pojman’s example situations about living in autonomy and living with theism. Situation A is about people being as free as possible but they are in a large room with poisoned gas that is slowly filling the room. Although they still have their freedom, they will die sooner. This shows that people will be able to do what they desire but slowly poverty, crime, and death will increase because there is no moral guidance nor boundaries on what the people should. That is why if secularism was true and theism was false, life would possibly be better with a higher …show more content…
Autonomy allows people to gain their own personal goals, yet it can lead to destruction and chaos. Majority of the people would not want to live in poverty or always having to keep their guards up because it would be easy for anyone to steal or try to kill them for things of great expense or less. Freedom is great but not at expense of losing one’s life. On the contrary, living in a theistic life, people have a meaning to why they are on earth because it is given or shown to by their higher being with a good promised ending for everyone. In order to get this great promise from their higher being, a person will to give up some of their freedom, which would include things that would harm themselves or others. There is also the comfort in knowing that God loves and cares for all people and has a plan for their lives. This is not only good morally but good for the community of people, to actually help one another to achieve personal goals together. This helps prevents people from wanting to do bad or evil things to get what they want and makes it safer for everyone. This also correlates with Pojman’s other example of situations living with theism or autonomy. In situation B, Pojman discusses having a purpose and giving up a little freedom in order to eliminate great sufferings in the world. A theistic world would be better for everyone spiritually and