More handpicked essays just for you.
Strengths and weakness of divine command theory
The strengths and weaknesses of the divine command theory
Strengths and weakness of divine command theory
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Strengths and weakness of divine command theory
The divine command theory is the view in which, what is right is what God commands, and what is wrong is what God forbids. The divine command theory brings morality and religion together in a way that provides a solution to arguments such as, moral relativism and the objectivity of ethics. A philosopher named Plato created The Euthyphro Dilemma, which was created from the dialogue from Socrates and Euthyphro. The Euthyphro Dilemma can be stated: “Is an action morally good because God commands it, or does God command it because it is morally good?” An individual might be more open to take a step back from the divine command theory and in its place to be something external to God. The ethical implications of this argument suggest that the correlation
From the beginning of humankind, people have constantly had to deal with inner battles. Many of these issues cease to exist as time goes on, while new ones arise to take their place. There is one issue, however, that has remained consistent throughout time – morality. For centuries, humans have fought against the outside world and themselves to keep their morals properly aligned. The issue of morality is so dominant that it is still plays a vital role in today’s society. This can be seen in wars, law systems, codes of conduct, and religious texts. An example of a religious text where this can be seen is in pages 185 - 188 of the Bhagavad Gita, where Krishna, also referred to as “The Blessed One”, guides Arjuna through his inner struggles between
or character of God, and that the morally right action is the one that God commands or
The Teleological Ethical Theories are concerned with the consequences of actions which means the basic standards of our actions being morally right or wrong depends on the good or evil generated (Business Jargons, n.d.). More specifically this campaign relates
For many years now, people have always wondered what ethical principle is the right one to follow. These individuals are all seeking the answer to the question that the ethical principles are trying to clarify: What defines moral behavior? The Divine Command Theory and the theories of cultural relativism are two principles of many out there that provide us with explanations on what our ethical decisions are based on and what we consider to be our moral compass in life. Even though these two theories make well-supported arguments on why they are the right principle to follow, it is hard to pinpoint which one should guide our choices because of the wide array of ethical systems. Therefore, what is morally right or wrong differs greatly depending
Dating all the way back to ancient Greece, Plato raised a challenge by merely asking, “Is it right because God commands it, or does God command it because it’s right?” Nowadays, this simple yet complex question poses a problem to modern day Christians. When understanding this question, you are forced to believe you only have one of two choices to accept. Those being either it is right because God commands it or God commands it because it is right. If it is right because God commands it then anything, specifically evil, could be right. On the other hand, if God commands it because it is right then the standard of goodness is no longer. Both options are hostile to Christianity. However, after further investigation, there is a third option: God’s very nature is the standard of goodness. By closely examining Plato’s Euthyphro Dilemma, it’s clear that a theist should undoubtedly accept the third option, being that of God’s nature is the standard of goodness.
Broadly, the divine command theory is a religious moral code in which God’s commands determine what human beings should or should not do. As such, it is expected for theists to subscribe to the divine command theory of morality. The deontological interpretation of the divine command theory separates actions into one of the following categories: mandatory for human beings to perform, prohibited for human beings to perform, or optional for human beings to perform. Those actions that are mandatory to perform are ones which have been expressly commanded by God. Failing to commit a mandatory action would be defying God’s commands, and thus, according to the divine command theory of morality, immoral. Actions that are prohibited are ones that God expressly commands human beings do not perform. Consequently, to perform a prohibited action would be immoral. Finally, those actions that God does not expressly command that human beings should perform or should avoid performing are optional; there are no moral implications to performing or not performing such acts. The rightness or wrongness of an action is inherently and wholly dependent upon th...
The Divine Command theory of ethics is a theory that states that an act is right or wrong and good or bad based on whether or not God commands or prohibits us from doing it. This means that the only thing that makes an action morally wrong is because God says it is. There are two sides to this theory; the restricted and the unrestricted. The restricted theory basically says that an action is obligatory if and only if it is good and God commanded it; the unrestricted theory states that an act is only obligatory if it is commanded by God, it is not obligatory if it is prohibited by God and it is optional if and only if God has not commanded nor prohibited it.
The Euthyphro Dilemma comes from Plato’s Dialogue “Euthyphro”. This dilemma has had a major effect on Theism. The Euthyphro Dilemma is based off of the idea, is what is morally good commanded by God because it is morally good, or is it morally good because it is commanded by God? Each of these two possibilities leads to consequences that the divine command theorists cannot accept. However the divine command theorist answers this question, his answer in the end is defeated. This dilemma has been a major problem for some theists, while other theists have believed that the Euthyphro Dilemma is a false dilemma. The Euthyphro Dilemma date all the way back to after 399 B.C. and remains a significant dilemma to this day.
In order to understand divine command theory we must first understand the nature of God and Morality. So we will start by taking a look at what makes an action moral. Once we understand what makes an action moral, we can then try to understand the author's’ viewpoint on the divine command theory of ethics. Understanding the viewpoint will allow us to dissect the author’s viewpoints and come up with counter-arguments that the author must then contend with.
In Jim Yerman’s “The Golden Rule,” the reader is presented with the notion that the world would most likely benefit from everyone simply remembering the mantra of “do unto others as you would have them do unto you”. Yerman mentions how we learn the Golden Rule at a young age, but over time we just seem to either forget or ignore it. The author also mentions that even if following the Golden Rule makes him look like a fool, he’s fine with that, especially if his small action makes the world a better place. This idea of the price of happiness and kindness is central to Yerman’s take on the Golden Rule.
In the reading and in lecture, it was established that Euthyphro has a dilemma with two very different theses. The first thesis is that Things are good because God loves them. What does this mean? I believe what the thesis is hinting at is that no one but God can define what is good or bad. Societal norms shape what we see as good, and what we see as bad. Perhaps God is the almighty author of the society. If He deems something to be good, then everyone accepts it. We cannot use our own judgment to determine one’s “goodness”. But in accordance with the theory, we cannot even control how we judge things. God has given us a predetermined outlook on life, and how we should view certain things. This kind of relates to what we talked about last week in lecture. If how we view things is predetermined, and we are not given the opportunity to make judgments on what is right or wrong, then our essence precedes our existence. In other words, we are not given the chance to form our own opinions, but rather accept what God has determined for us in life because he is almighty. The second thesis is much
The Theory of Natural Law, defined in three aspects, there being a natural order in the world, everything having a purpose and how things are and how things ought to be. This theory also states that humans can distinguish between what is right or wrong through human reason/moral knowledge. On the other hand, the Divine Command Theory is a view of morality and believes that what’s right or wrong is set by God’s moral commands. God’s commands tell us what is morally obligatory, permitted and wrong.
The Customer Service Dept. of the Gods sincerely apologises for any perceived wrongdoings on our part regarding the hardships that you and your men endured on your voyage home to Ithaca. We understand how frustrating these mishaps must be. However, after careful consideration and review of your complaints, it becomes clear that the bulk of your dissatisfaction has been caused by nothing more than your own misdeeds- rendering this discourse pointless and irrelevant.
The principle of holiness came up in Socrates and Euthyphro debate as the two discussed whether or not holiness was something that the gods indeed loved or if holiness was something that the gods loved because it was in fact holy. The concept of holiness between the two is prominent because they needed to know exactly how the gods broke down and acknowledged the holiness. This was a major factor because it basically set standards and laws for people that really chose to worship. It basically breaks down if an act is holy or if the act was something that was adopted by a particular god and made holy. In this paper I will explain how the concept of holiness cultivates in the discussion and why it takes a prominent position between the two.
Although the human mind is accustomed to manifesting itself in binary oppositions constituted of reason and passion which extends to all facets of life, such a notion is underplayed in the face of god. Removed from our jurisdiction, the nature of our existence is dependant on far greater forces that transcend this fabricated conflict, and attributes an element of emptiness and inconsequence to the sense of perfection of “tradition, order” and “all things”. Through the deus ex machina ending of the play, Euripides condemns the necessity that all actions are derived either from reason or