How Does Augustine Explain The Nature Of Good And Evil

Explain the origin and nature of good and evil in Augustine. In the Enchiridion on Faith, Hope, and Love, Augustine thoughtfully examines the origin and nature of Good and Evil, which is important for the daily Christian living. Augustine claims that God is the greatest good and He creates humans with that same good, so God does not create Evil. However, Evil, writes Augustine, is like a parasite, which comes as a deformation or corruption of something good. It is clear to say, “There can be no evil where there is no good”, whereas good can exist without evil. From this, we should not take evil as a substance in itself but rather as an accident. Though evil is not natural to human but God creates with free will, therefore human evil can be a source of evil. In short, “nothing can be evil except something which is good,” in spite of the fact that good and evil are genuine contraries.

Present the function of reason and passion, and their relation.
In Hume’s Treatise the relation of reason and passion where he says that reason is, and ought only to be slave of the passions.
Hume’s concern is to give rise to moral judgments compared to rationalist position, which takes reason to be sufficient. Reason is to discover what is true or false and passion is what moves one to act. The force that drives one to action is the passion because reason itself is not sufficient, whether it be desire, love, or fear. However, it is the reason that does all the ground works, analyzing the causes, drawing conclusions, but the action will not be performed without the presence of the
passions.

What is a categorical imperative? Where is it derived from?
Categorical imperative may be defined as a way of evaluating motivations for action. It is best known in its first formulation: "Act only according to the maxim, which you can at the same time it becomes a universal law". This means that a rule of action is moral if it is applicable not only by me, but by everyone, that is to say that a principle of action is moral if it can become universal. When I act I have to ask myself the question of what would happen if everyone was like me. That is why lying or stealing is morally unjustifiable for Kant because these maxims are not applicable to everyone. The second formulation of the categorical imperative is more famous: "Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, always at the same time as an end and never simply as a means ". The consequence of such a philosophy is that we can never know if people act morally because morality acts in secret of each motivations. We can just see from the outside if men behave in accordance with moral principles but we will never know if they are truly moral.