The question of whether moral principles are universal in nature has been a longstanding and debated issue in moral philosophy. Different philosophical perspectives—subjectivism, deontology, and relativism—offer varied views on the universality of moral principles.

1. Subjectivism:
Subjectivism posits that moral principles are subjective and vary from individual to individual. From this perspective, moral judgments are contingent on personal feelings, preferences, or cultural influences. The subjectivist argues that there are no objective moral truths that apply universally. Rather, moral judgments are expressions of individual attitudes or societal conventions.

Evaluation of Subjectivism:
While subjectivism acknowledges the diversity of moral views, it faces challenges in providing a foundation for moral discourse and resolution. Without any objective standards, subjectivism can lead to moral relativism, where conflicting moral opinions are seen as equally valid, hindering the possibility of meaningful ethical dialogue.

2. Deontology:
Deontological ethics, associated with philosophers like Immanuel Kant, asserts that moral principles are based on objective rules or duties. According to deontology, certain actions are inherently right or wrong, irrespective of the consequences. Deontologists argue for the existence of universal moral principles grounded in reason and rationality.

Evaluation of Deontology:
Deontology provides a robust framework for establishing universal moral principles. However, critics argue that rigid adherence to rules may lead to moral absolutism and fail to account for the complexities of real-world situations. Furthermore, disagreements may persist about which deontological principles should be considered universally valid.

3. Relativism:
Relativism contends that moral principles are context-dependent and vary across cultures or individuals. Cultural relativism asserts that morality is shaped by cultural norms, while individual relativism posits that morality is a matter of personal preference. Relativism rejects the idea of universal moral truths and emphasizes the diversity of ethical perspectives.

Evaluation of Relativism:
Relativism acknowledges the cultural and individual diversity in moral beliefs, but it faces challenges in addressing moral disagreements. If every perspective is considered equally valid, relativism struggles to provide a basis for resolving conflicts or condemning morally reprehensible practices. Additionally, it raises concerns about the potential for moral relativism to justify oppressive or harmful cultural practices.

Conclusion:
The debate over the universality of moral principles remains complex and multifaceted. Subjectivism emphasizes the subjective nature of morality, deontology asserts the existence of objective moral principles, and relativism underscores the variability of moral beliefs across contexts. Each perspective offers insights and faces criticisms. Striking a balance that recognizes both universal principles and contextual nuances may provide a more comprehensive understanding of morality. While diverse cultural and individual perspectives are acknowledged, the challenge lies in establishing a framework for ethical discourse and action that transcends purely subjective or relativistic views.

The problem of Akrasia, also known as weakness of will or moral weakness, revolves around the apparent contradiction between knowing what is morally right and yet acting against that knowledge. It explores the phenomenon of individuals acting against their better judgment or moral principles, succumbing to desires or temptations that they are fully aware are detrimental.

Augustine, a prominent figure in Christian theology, grappled with the problem of Akrasia in his philosophical and theological reflections. In his work, particularly in the context of his early struggles with morality, Augustine offers insights into the nature of human will, desire, and the role of divine grace in overcoming moral weakness.

Augustine's View on Akrasia:

1. The Nature of Desire:

   • Augustine recognized the influential role of desire in human actions. He argued that desires are inherently tied to the will, and the will is ultimately oriented toward what it perceives as good. However, Augustine acknowledged the possibility of disordered desires, where individuals may be drawn to apparent goods that are, in fact, contrary to their ultimate well-being.

2. Conflict within the Soul:

   • Augustine portrayed the human soul as experiencing internal conflicts between the higher, rational self (the intellect or reason) and the lower, appetitive self (desires and passions). The struggle between these aspects of the self contributes to the problem of Akrasia.

3. Role of Grace and Divine Assistance:

   • Augustine's solution to the problem of Akrasia involved a profound reliance on divine grace. He argued that human beings, due to the inherited effects of original sin, are in need of divine assistance to overcome moral weakness. Grace, according to Augustine, works within the individual, transforming the will and aligning it with the divine.

Augustine's success in resolving the problem of Akrasia can be evaluated from different perspectives:

1. Theological Perspective:

   • From a theological standpoint, Augustine's emphasis on divine grace aligns with Christian teachings on the transformative power of God's assistance. Augustine's solution resonates with the Christian idea that individuals, through a relationship with God, can find strength to overcome moral weaknesses.

2. Critiques and Challenges:

   • However, some philosophical critics argue that Augustine's reliance on divine grace might seem to diminish human responsibility and agency. The question arises whether Augustine's solution fully addresses the philosophical intricacies of Akrasia without introducing theological assumptions.

3. Influence on Later Thought:

   • Augustine's insights into the problem of Akrasia have had a profound impact on Christian theology and philosophy. Many later philosophers and theologians engaged with Augustine's ideas, contributing to ongoing discussions about free will, moral agency, and divine grace.

In conclusion, Augustine approached the problem of Akrasia by delving into the complexities of human will, desire, and the transformative role of divine grace. While his theological perspective offers a unique resolution that aligns with Christian doctrine, the success of his solution depends on one's acceptance of theological premises. Augustine's contributions have sparked continued debates and reflections on the nature of human agency, morality, and the potential influences of divine intervention.