WHAT IS morals?

Morals have validity if separated from the philosophical elements of advice and sermon. In this context, the moral argument does not only define the existence of God but also set the attributes of God, such as a coin, wise, omniscient, and will in the world and the Hereafter.
We need to know that this type of argument is based on the argument must be character, or referred to in the argument about the necessity sent the prophets, where the argument of prophethood itself after verification is the existence of God and nature, his perfection, or didasarian on one of the arguments , as the argument of faith and wujub, huduts, movement. If so, then the moral argument has validity kesetaran with the arguments above, and counted as a new form of argument. And if the moral argument does not disandarkan on one of the arguments mentioned above, he certainly did not have validity as an argument or proof in determining the existence of God. Therefore, if the argument has assumed moral basis-the basis of a perfect, still considered as the philosophy and practical philosophy is not a theoretical and can not be used as proof of existence verification. If the moral arguments in classified areas revelation and prophethood, the area is counted as part of the discussion of the philosophy and theoretical determination of the Lord is the basis makrifat religion, revelation and prophethood, then still can not be reached by this argument, that is, this argument can not prove prinsipalitas existence of God.
In conclusion, if the moral argument disandarkan on theoretical philosophy can then counted as part of the proposition and the arguments establishing the existence of God and itupun must rely on the argument character; argument because the disposition other than as part of theoretical philosophy, the foundation-a foundation that is used quite perfect. Thus the moral argument can be one of the arguments to determine the existence of God.
What is the legal subterfuge about goodness? What good has meaning if the review of the necessity of the absolute? The intrinsic meaning of goodness is in good morals and good nature (that is inderawi) is the same. Therefore, good morals is not the only one virtue, though virtue is most high, there are also good which is the subject of desire-desire sensory. So good composed of two absolute goodness, and goodness are two escort us to a mengkonsepsi comprehension and understanding of the highest good, this is the highest virtue of the intrinsic desire-the desire to unite natural and pure will. And goodness, if seen from the side of happiness is virtue, virtue is seen from the dimensions that he is so good to be the essence of happiness terms. To realize the highest good of the effect on all the reality must exist dikonsepsi on a form that integrates itself with the purity, virtue and happiness. And is called the existence of God. Understand the necessity for the existence of God must be known in depth the relationship between man, nature and morals.
Personal happiness is the condition where all things established in accordance with the desire and the will. So happiness is conformity and harmony between the natural character and goals of grown up to be received. If the form must relate to the happiness and virtue associated with each other, then this happiness may not materialize unless there is a mediator with the reason for all the reality of a different nature, which include the presence of base fitness and unity between happiness and virtue. Therefore, the intrinsic goodness (absolute) into medium realize the highest good is relatively high, the absolute highest good create a nature which is the most natural and sempurnanya.
According to Kant things, such as freedom, immortality of the soul and God are things that can only be reached with the proposition that proof-footing on the practical intellect, and not rationally based on the theoretical. And things have become "things that have been received" (al-musallamah) by the practical intellect.
"Al-Musallamah" is not just a subjective personal confidence, but something that will be objective and universal; the intellect that dub themselves "al-musallamah", because that confidence is by a valid and correct and the acceptance of "al-musallamah "is a recognition on the high position on the practical intellect theoretical intellect. A high rank does not mean that the way of intellect produced a practical knowledge of the "al-musallamah" that, where the intellect does not have the theoretical ability to find out, but the altitude means that the degree is through charity (praktiis) or morals, we define the obligation -kemestiannya (pre-condition) and then base our faith or morals to the charity (practical), and where faith is based on the needs of the practical intellect that are universal. There is no problem that leads to the faith, but rather, faith is a perfect fit with us. Therefore, if we have the perfect theoretical knowledge about God and the immortality of the soul, the review of the literary dimension it is impossible pemaksaan and there is no pressure from this knowledge that leads to the will of god (the will) we, or morals to be intermediaries and we like a blood a stream of fear and the desire to him, the faith to prepare a place for the selection will, glory and virtue.
Conclusion of this theory allowed us to see the tasks in the form of commands that are not only from the intellect but also originating from the Lord. So the form we will accept a religion where religion is placed after the laying on morals and duties, but the converse of that is a religion based on the character and morals are also based on the intellect (nous practical)
Morals have a formula and a variety of descriptions. Some of these provisions and with berdalil totality commands on the existence of moral order and the granting of permanent and absolute which is called the Lord. And some berdalil on the existence of sources other than the man will have a higher human will, the strength of feeling in moral terms and conditions where the particular inclination of the human practice contrary. The use keniscayaan law with the law to define the source of law, or because the law in the same moral-cultural community different assumptions assert the existence of God put the view that this law in the human heart.
Call the world or morals followed by feelings of guilt, shame and regret, or fear when ugliness, or afraid to act before it is a premise-there on the premise that all moral arguments, for after all of that set form allows formulation and descriptions-which may vary with the formulation rumasan-mentioned above-on the existence of existence, even though the formulation of the argument has not been set up to dzat necessity and essence of God.
If the first preamble of the existence of the law the same is received before where people act and feel anxious after doing deterioration feel regret and shame. Universality law and the laws of this where the individuals and different nations and diverse cultures and social conditions that vary the peak power reaches the peak or valley fell to humiliation, or get the support or resistance, or sequestered triumphant from the community or village or in the community when the city's modern practice law or there are feelings of fear and sin when menyalahinya, the conclusion can be drawn that the source of this law is not of the conditions and assumptions mentioned, but because for him there and a source attached to the outside of this.