Divine Command Theory And Act-Utilitarianism

Ethics

Ethics relates to what is morally right or wrong (Velasquez, Thomson-Wadsworth, 2011). Different schools of thought exist concerning ethics defined by their moral principles. Despite the three schools of thoughts all concerned with what is morally right or wrong, Act-Utilitarianism seems to present a more plausible argument than Natural Law and Divine Command Theory. This is because: Act-Utilitarianism is considered as one of the best known and the most influential moral theories; it is one of the forms of consequentialism which defines whether the actions are moral relying on their effects in the future. What is more, this theory rejects moral codes or different systems which consist of taboos (based on traditions and customs) and orders

Within this theory, God is represented as a moral sovereign and is an omniscient and omnipotent creator of the world; people learn what right or wrong by gaining knowledge of God’s moral commands (Hinman, 2012). Thus, this theory is based on the framework of theism, and can vary according to the particular region and views of the individual theorist who investigates this topic, but there is one common opinion or even statement that within this theory only God can define what is morality and moral obligations. Moreover, metaphysics is also used as the foundation for morality in Divine Command Theory. Nevertheless, one should note that when evaluating the philosophical merits and drawbacks of this theory, it is necessary to take a broad perspective and consider the connections which can appear between the theory and other religious, psychological and moral issues, as well as the relevant questions connected with epistemology, aesthetics and metaphysics, which help to make a plan of life. Another important thing is that here it is possible to act for self-interest, as commands of self-sacrifice are considered as those approved by God. On the other hand there is something unsuitable concerning punishment, because in most cases people try to avoid it and instead to gain an eternal bliss which help them to achieve a moral

Natural law is a divine providence that enables understanding of right and wrong things (Finnis, 2011). Divine Command Theory asserts certain acts as good because God commands it and a wrong is because God forbids it (Hinman, 2012). Therefore, how about an atheist who does not believe in the existence of God? And for those who do not believe in divinity? These weaken the two schools of thought. However, some similarities can be seen among these schools of thought in that Divine Command Theory involves the whim of God just like Natural Law Theory, which has divine providence resulting from God’s will, but in in the letter there are more freedom then in the former one. Act-utilitarianism in general brings more benefits to the society because within this theory people set up limitations and taboos for them (Barrow, 2015). This is much akin to Divine Command Theory that links good acts to God’s whims (Velasquez, Thomson-Wadsworth, 2011). Thus, all of them somehow are interconnected because there are still some common features, even if they are