More handpicked essays just for you.
Strengths and weaknesses in the divine command theory
Strengths and weaknesses in the divine command theory
Divine command theory of morality
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Divine Command Theory is an act that is morally required just because it is commanded by God and immoral just because God forbids it. The main question for DCT is, “ Does God command actions because they are morally right, or are actions morally right because God commands them?” it is said that prior to God's declaration of morals nothing was right or wrong. So, did God have reasons for his decisions? The answer for example is, that God recognizes what is already bad about torture, there is something in its nature that makes it wrong, since God wants us to be good he orders us not to attempt such actions.
The Euthyphro Argument explains that Either God has reasons that support His commands, or God lacks reasons for His commands and if God
In the context of the dialogue, this simply segues to a logical argument about the definition of piety, and the question is more or less rhetorical as Socrates asks it. When Euthyphro chooses the first option, the discussion moves on to his next point without further ado, and the implication that this limits the omnipotence of the gods is ignored, probably because the omnipotence of the pantheon of gods wasn?t an assumption of Greek theology (after all, as we read in the dialogue, the father and grandfather of Zeus were castrated; what kind of omnipotent being would allow that to happen to himself?). However, when read with a Judeo-Christian concept of God in mind, the dilemma becomes this:
Euthyphro’s second definition of piety is “the pious is what the gods love”. Socrates takes this idea and
God is all loving and wants the best for everyone and as we concluded with DCT, God is not all
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
of the arguments in favor of God, or a so-called "higher power" are based on
In Judaism, God is seen as having a contractual relationship with the Jewish people where they must obey his holy laws in return for their status of the chosen people. God rewards or punishes Jewish people based on whether they obey or disobey his will. In parts of the Old Testament, however, God does show mercy or forgiveness, and in later interpretations God’s laws such as the Ten Commandments are followed
In Judaism, God is seen as having a contractual relationship with the Jewish people where they must obey his holy laws in return for their status of the chosen people. God rewards or punishes Jewish people based on whether they obey or disobey his will. In parts of the Old Testament, however, God does show mercy or forgiveness, and in later interpretations God’s laws such as the Ten Commandments are followed not only out of loyalty to God but also because of their high moral character.
The divine command theorist’s presumed critique of the divine will theory is twofold: first, what would happen in an instance in which the command and the will of God are not expressing the same thing? If God’s commands are his only way of communicating intent, but his commands are not perfect reflections of his intention, then how can human beings possibly know what actions are morally mandatory or prohibited? Second, in such an instance, what is the point of a command if not to communicate God’s will? The divine command theorist would charge that the point of a command under the divine will theory becomes arbitrary, and theists altogether reject the notion that God ever acts arbitrarily.
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.
Euthyphro was arguing that by doing what the gods believe is holy and pious you are making them better, in other words you are taking care of them and it is like a kind of service that you are doing towards the gods. Euthyphro said, “The kind of care, Socrates, that slaves take of their masters” which meant that you are taking care of them in the sense that you are making them better and not actually caring for them (17, 13d). In other words, you are helping improve them and this is a service that the gods appreciate and want you to do. He believed that this service is improving the gods and that they like this service. The gods believe that being holy is a service towards them, therefore there should be a reason on why the gods use us and want to reward our holiness. He believes that the gods choose what is holy for a reason and should be approved by
The Divine Command Theory is an ethical theory that basically proposes that God is the sole distinguisher between what is right and what is wrong. The textbook describes that under this theory, God commands what is moral and forbids what is immoral. Critics of this theory state that if God is the sole decision maker of morality, immoral actions could be acceptable if He willed it, and thus, God’s authority would be subjective and arbitrary. However, proponents contend that God would not allow immoral actions because he is omnipotent and all good. To follow the Divine Command Theory, one must believe and trust that it is in God’s nature to do good, and He will not act against his nature. By believing in this, one would dispute the critics’ argument by proving that God his not making
... otherwise. If you feel that your unexplainable moral values are true because of divine guidance, then another person probably feels that his unexplainable moral beliefs (contradictory to yours) are also true as they are caused by divine guidance: Examples of contradictory claims of divine guidance abound. The only way to resolve the disagreement is by reasoning about basic moral values independently of the fact that your culture has such and such moral beliefs—and such reasoning leads to utilitarianism.
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.
The first reason focuses on the belief of faith. The following passage is taken from the Bible. It has excellent meaning because it shows that everyone has faith. Having faith is the first sign that shows everyone believes in a religion. There are two good definitions of religion. The first is belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe. The second is a personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship. The passage shows that everyone has an institutionalized system that has belief. The passage is as follows, ?Everyone believes in something. No one can endure the stress and cares of life without faith in God. Atheists cannot prove there is no God. Pantheists cannot prove that everything is God. Pragmatists cannot prove that what will count for them in the future is what works for them now. Nor can agnostics prove that it is impossible to know one way or the other. Faith is unavoidable, even if we chose to believe only in ourselves. What is to be decided is what evidence we think is pertinent, how we are going to interpret that evidence, and who or what we are willing to believe in.? (Luke 16:16)(4) The passage is great proof that there is a God. It shows that everyone has faith. Faith is a big aspect in religion. With every religion, there is likely to be a single holy being, a god.
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.