Divine Command Theory And The Euthyphro Problem
1.
What is divine command theory? What is the difference between the strong and the weak forms of divine command theory? What is the Euthyphro problem and how does it relate? Evaluate either strong or weak divine command theory in light of the Euthyphro problem.
The divine command theory attempts to explain morality through religion more specifically it makes a direct connection between God and morality. Superficially divine command theory is dependent on the commands or character of God in determining whether an act is morally wrong or right. This adds much confusion to the divine command theory, as the theory will differ from one religion to an other based upon the ever changing commands and characteristics different Gods of different
religions take. While divine command theory originally seems to be following the commandments of God, it does however have two very different perspectives. The strong form of the divine command theory states that something is only good if God commands it be good, meaning that the act of God approving, willing or commanding something is what makes an act morally right. The other form is the soft form which states that things are good or bad independent of God, essentially God is looked at like a middle man in this form, because something is good that is why God commands it. The two forms of the divine command theory are key factors in the Euthyphro problem. Plato documents in his dialogue “Euthyphro” a conversation between Socrates and Euthyphro where Socratese ask “ Is the pious loved by the Gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is loved by the Gods?”. At face value this seems rather confusing but in reality it is posing the same questions discussed in the two different forms of the divine command theory. Is something good because God says it is or is it commanded by God because it is good? The strong form of the divine command theory says something is only good if God says it is. With this we develop a slight problem. If God was to command that this weekend, during Easter, we are to donate all the money in our bank account to charity, that would be considered morally good. However under the strong form of divine command theory, God could also command us to murder our siblings and that would also be considered good. The biggest problem with the strong form of the DCT is that it makes morality very arbitrary, dependent on one being which makes the whole idea of morality very mysterious and unclear. The positive aspect of the strong form is that it allows one who believes in God being the supreme creator and decision maker the reinforcement behind their belief. With the strong form of the DCT God is the supreme decider of good and bad. The weak form of the divine command theory exclaims that it is only because things are right or good that God commands them. The best part about this form is that it takes much of the randomness out of goodness. Meaning killing your siblings on Easter would never become morally good because the whim of God will not change affecting the goodness of one act. However one of the major problems or objections to
What is divine command theory? What is the difference between the strong and the weak forms of divine command theory? What is the Euthyphro problem and how does it relate? Evaluate either strong or weak divine command theory in light of the Euthyphro problem.
The divine command theory attempts to explain morality through religion more specifically it makes a direct connection between God and morality. Superficially divine command theory is dependent on the commands or character of God in determining whether an act is morally wrong or right. This adds much confusion to the divine command theory, as the theory will differ from one religion to an other based upon the ever changing commands and characteristics different Gods of different
religions take. While divine command theory originally seems to be following the commandments of God, it does however have two very different perspectives. The strong form of the divine command theory states that something is only good if God commands it be good, meaning that the act of God approving, willing or commanding something is what makes an act morally right. The other form is the soft form which states that things are good or bad independent of God, essentially God is looked at like a middle man in this form, because something is good that is why God commands it. The two forms of the divine command theory are key factors in the Euthyphro problem. Plato documents in his dialogue “Euthyphro” a conversation between Socrates and Euthyphro where Socratese ask “ Is the pious loved by the Gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is loved by the Gods?”. At face value this seems rather confusing but in reality it is posing the same questions discussed in the two different forms of the divine command theory. Is something good because God says it is or is it commanded by God because it is good? The strong form of the divine command theory says something is only good if God says it is. With this we develop a slight problem. If God was to command that this weekend, during Easter, we are to donate all the money in our bank account to charity, that would be considered morally good. However under the strong form of divine command theory, God could also command us to murder our siblings and that would also be considered good. The biggest problem with the strong form of the DCT is that it makes morality very arbitrary, dependent on one being which makes the whole idea of morality very mysterious and unclear. The positive aspect of the strong form is that it allows one who believes in God being the supreme creator and decision maker the reinforcement behind their belief. With the strong form of the DCT God is the supreme decider of good and bad. The weak form of the divine command theory exclaims that it is only because things are right or good that God commands them. The best part about this form is that it takes much of the randomness out of goodness. Meaning killing your siblings on Easter would never become morally good because the whim of God will not change affecting the goodness of one act. However one of the major problems or objections to