Bonjour, je suis en licence d'anglais philosophie, et j'ai essayé de corriger toute mes fautes de grammaire. En ai-je oublié ? Merci d'avance !

1) In my opinion, it’s true. Religions gave us, since a long time, a definition of ethics. But, in Dr Laura’s letter, this seems to be the worst advice for being a good person. However, I understand the believers; to already have instructions and answers about what we are supposed to do is reassuring. Hence, we can’t have ethics idea only with a book, we must build this ourselves, in your mind. Religion can indeed manipulate our sense of ethics. Cilia F

2) The difference is the holy birth. If gods made “saint” or “sacred” things, they were powerful. Or holy’s things exist because the gods approved it? Therefore, it would mean that they don’t control everything. This speaks about the god’s laws’ place in our ethic definition.

3) This quote would mean that living rules are inevitable. We need laws for have an appropriate behavior and regulating our impulses. Laws for a good society living. Indeed, human beings, perhaps need laws, or rules, for enjoying their liberty. Standards have not to be fundamentally the same, but we need them. Cilia F

4) Simon Blackburn describes the possibility of self- interested actions constantly. And first of all, does it exist, true altruism, or are we so selfish? Indeed, the way of saying is important. For example: At his office, a man gave his chair to a waiting pregnant woman. Is it true altruism? No, he gave his chair only to maintain his image. So, when we will tell this story, we’ll say: he’s so kind, he gave his chair to the pregnant women. And not: He is so intelligent, he gave his chair for maintain his personal image at his work. However, the true is in the second sentence. Hence, we all act in an altruism way, but if we look in the background, we perhaps see the selfish true. Cilia F