THE SIGNIFICANT HISTORICAL LINK BETWEEN RELIGION AND ETHICS

The relationship between ethics and religion, especially after the secularization of western societies and social de-religiousization, has been the subject of many studies. This connection can be examined from the aspects such as semantic, cognitive existence, historical, etc.  The appearance of it is the principle of the historical relationship between religion and ethics is generally agreed upon by philosophers and thinkers. At the same time, the nature of this connection is the subject of questioning and investigation by some thinkers. Some contemporaries, while accepting the principle of historical connection between religion and ethics, have rejected the logical connection between the two, and from this point of view, morality is independent of religion and not based on religious foundations. Abolghasem Fanaei in his book "din dar tarazoye tarikh" (Religion inthe scale of ethics), while accepting the deep historical connection between religion and ethics, claims that this connection is not a logical connection and cannot be the reason for the stability of ethics on religious foundations. In the way of proving his claim, he criticized the views of two moral philosophers, Anscombe and McIntyre. In this essay, we have tried to criticize his claims regarding the historical relationship between ethics and religion. The method is critical, historical and analytical. In this article, we have shown that Abolghasem Fanaei's understanding of the views of moral philosophers is not a complete understanding, and his criticisms of Anscombe and McIntyre's views are not valid. Therefore, the author's claim on the independence of morality from religion in the historical approach remains unfounded. Also, by stating the historical evidence, it is clarified that the historical connection between ethics and religion is much deeper than what the author believes, and it is stated that the discovery of a logical connection from the historical connection is not a reasonable expectation; Because each of them is independently the subject of scientific discussion.