1A: Divine Command Flashcards
What are teleological ethical theories?
focuses on a purpose - the purpose is understood to be good in itself
Why are teleological theories sometimes called consequentialist?
they generally judge actions by consequences: often implies that acts aren’t inherently right or wrong but must be judged relative to their situation
Explain with examples why teleological and deontological are not exact synonyms
Because some ethical theories are teleological but aren’t consequentialist
What is the key feature of deontological ethical theories?
rules to follow which are inherently right or wrong: situation/consequences don’t change
What is meant by absolutist ethics?
based on the assumption that there are ethical absolutes. ethical absolute is a command that is true for all time, in all places, and in all situations
Theonomy
both it and religion depend upon a common source for their principles and values. the ‘common source’ is understood to be god. literally means “god’s laws”
Objective
factual and uninfluenced by opinion
Deontological
ethical theories that say goodness is about obeying rules and doing your duty
DCT in a nutshell
- actions are right or wrong dependent on whether or not they correspond to God’s commands
- it is our duty to obey rules commanded by god; any acts commanded by god are necessarily good and right. any acts forbidden by god are necessarily bad or wrong
- deontological, absolutist and theonomous; claims morality is objective and there is such thing as ‘moral truth’
Why is DCT deontological?
it focuses on the nature of an act as good or bad in itself, regardless of its consequences, which sees good and bad as objective
Can the 10 commandments ever be broken?
Yes - eg ‘You shall not murder’ and ‘You shall not steal’ can be broken in some circumstances
God as the origin and regulator of morality
- DCTs believe what is moral is determined by what God commands. therefore morality is ultimately completely dependent on God’s commands.
- Generally those who accept DCT look to sacred texts to discover God’s commands
- ie in Jewish tradition, God’s moral commands can be found in the Bible: ie the Decalogue tells us what is morally wrong because God commanded it
Right and wrong as objective truths based on God’s will
- If what God commands determines what is moral, then that means right and wrong are objective truths
- This means morality is not influenced by people’s personal feelings, opinions or reasoning about what is right or wrong (eg it doesn’t matter what humanity thinks about stealing, it is wrong because God has commanded it that way)
- Therefore God’s will alone decides what is right and wrong, and human feelings about morality have no authority: God has total authority
- William Ockham: “With Him a thing becomes right solely because He wants to”
Moral goodness is achieved by complying with divine commands
- If a person wishes to be moral, the only way to do this is to follow God’s commands (eg moral obligation consists purely in being obedient to God’s commands)
- Religions such as Christianity, Judaism and Islam offer reasons why God’s commands should be obeyed. Eg Adam and Eve were expelled from the Garden of Eden for not following God’s command
- The idea that moral goodness is achieved by following divine commands is strongly supported in the OT book of Deuteronomy which states “the Lord your God will be merciful if you listen and keep to all his commands”
Divine command as a requirement of God’s omnipotence
- An omnipotent God by definition must have complete power over everything, including morality
- If God did not have complete power over morality this would suggest God is not omnipotent, this is because if God did not control morality, ‘something else’ must control what is right and wrong. This would make ‘something else’ more powerful than God, destroying God’s omnipotence
- Therefore, God has to control morality or he wouldn’t be omnipotent
Divine Command as an objective meta-physical foundation for morality
- Meta-physical means ‘beyond the physical’ and relates to concepts that are not material but still have an objective existence eg they exist outside of human minds
- The divine attributes are metaphysical
- Omnibenevolence relates to ‘all living’ and also implied the divine being is the supreme good and source of goodness
- The understanding seen by the Bible writers
- The origin of morality is not from human beings but from within the nature and activity of God
- So according to DCT, the definition of ‘good’ and ‘right’ is simply ‘commanded by God’ and the definition of ‘bad’ and ‘wrong’ is simply ‘forbidden by God’
What does it mean to describe God as the ‘origin’ and ‘regulator’ of morality?
Morality is ultimately completely dependent upon the commands of God
What do we means by ‘objective, moral truth’?
Morality is not influenced by people’s personal feelings or opinions or reasoning about what is right or wing. It is decided solely by God
Name a scholar from the Middle Ages who took the view that something is right simply because God decides it is
William Ockham
According to DCT, how can a person be ‘good’?
complying with God’s commandments
Genesis 22
God tells Abraham to offer his son Issac as a sacrifice
Robert Adams’ Modified DCT
- addresses Euthyphro dilemma by saying it is logically possible for God to command cruelty because he is omnipotent but it would be unthinkable for God to condemn things like murder because of his omnibenevolent nature
- He proposes an action is morally wrong if and only if it defies the commands of a loving God: if cruelty were commanded, he would not be loving
According to Adams, was Abraham morally right or wrong to follow God’s command here?
He was morally wrong because the action was usually wrong (murder) and defies an omnibenevolent God
The Euthyphro Dilemma
- proposed by Plato
- it presents two logical questions: 1. Is something good because God commands it? or 2. Does God command something because it’s good) - either option challenges divine attributes
- Option one preserves omnipotence because it means God has power over morality, but challenges omnibenevolence because it reduces morality to nothing more than God’s whims and raises problems of Abhorrent Commands
- Option two challenges omnipotence because it implies there’s a source of morality external to God and God just complies with it
The Arbitrariness Problem
- Arises if we accept the first option of Euthyphro Dilemma; a thing is only good if God commands it; suggests that DCT appears to render the content of morality arbitrary (arbitrary means based on random choice)
- If DCT is true then what is good and bad depends on nothing more than God’s whims - whims are not an adequate foundation for morality
- Conncets to ‘Abhorrent Commands’ criticism ; in places in the Bible, God seems to utter commands which are morally troubling ie Genesis 22
The Pluralism Objection
- it is impossible to know which god’s or religion’s commands should be followed, especially because some religions contradict each other, making it impossible to accept all of them
- Eg in Islam it is seen that God commands divorce is morally acceptable but in general Christian tradition teaches that it isn’t
Challenge - Independence problem
By claiming that good is ‘good in itself, and God just enforces it, we are saying that there must be a superior authority, independent of God, which means that morality is not grounded in God
Response to independence problem
Most religious believers would assert the supposed divine attribute of omnipotence in order to argue against the independence problem and uphold the idea of morality being grounded in God
Challenge - Arbitrary
Right and wrong are determined by the command of a divine being. Thus morality seems completely random - based on God’s whims, and not knowable through human reason. Equally it could have been otherwise for example. conceivably, God might have commanded killing to be morally right.
Response to arbitrary challenge
Adams responds by grounding DCT in the character of a loving God.
Moral wrongness is therefore whatever goes against the commands of a loving God. This maintains divine sovereignty and emphasises omnibenevolence. But this response just makes goodness internal to God, and raises the Euthyphro dilemma again.
Challenge - abhorrent commands
DCT is deontological, absolutist and objective. Commands must be obeyed without qualification. This can lead to intolerance and hatred eg against homosexuals or the divorced. Also, Biblically there are examples of abhorrent commands eg Abraham and Isaac; Jephthah’s daughter etc.
Response to abhorrent commands challenge
- Some conservative Christians would argue that what might seem immoral to human beings would not be if we had complete knowledge as God does.
- Liberals might argue that the subjective Biblical writers were mistaken about these commands being from God.
- Some thinkers suggest a weak form of DCT which emphasizes key principles in divine commands but not specific rules. This sees DCT as a group of interlocking precepts which must inform each other eg in Christianity, ‘do not commit adultery’ could be qualified by ‘love your neighbour’ and ‘forgive others’ - so intolerance and hatred of others is never acceptable.
Challenge - emptiness problem
- If morality is internal to God (because God is omnipotent), then morality is relative to God.
- He commands what is moral, based on his own internal nature.
- Thus statements like “God is good” and “God’s commands are good are rendered empty tautologies: such as “God acts in accordance with his commands” and “God’s commands are in accordance with his commands”
- Thus God does not command what is good, because it is good, but because He is what He is
Challenge - DCT over simplifies ethics
If morality is based on obedience to divine commands then complex situations eg abortion become very simple to solve - this approach may not do justice to the many issues involved in the situation.
Response to the challenge that DCT over simplifies ethics
There is no ethical situation in which the features of that situation are fully known (intentions of people involved, possible consequences etc). Given human ignorance, clear moral precepts do not oversimplify, but offer direction to morality, as otherwise it is impossible for humans to perceive what is truly right.
Challenge - DCT denies personal responsibility
Obedience to divine commands prevent individuals from the need to consider the ethical features of the situations for themselves (autonomy), as they are given a ready answer. This can lead to moral immaturity.
Response to challenge that DCT denies personal responsibility
DCT offers key moral precepts that ought to take priority in moral thinking (eg taking human life has a high priority). It does not try to prevent moral thinking, which may in fact reveal other ethical features - reflecting other precepts (eg love your neighbour)
Strengths of DCT
- Robert Adams points out that because morality is grounded in God it cannot be arbitrary because it depends upon God’s omnibenevolent character and so whatever God commands is a reflection of this.
- It is consistent with religious belief and takes all responsibility away from human beings to make crucial decisions. Its template becomes a secure and consistent guide for life.
Weaknesses of DCT
- Baggini: Adams’ response just extends the problem - ‘This doesn’t seem to work, however, because the dilemma can just be restated: is God’s nature good because it is good or good because it is God’s?’
- there are too many inconsistencies both between, and within. religions to accept that morality originates with God.
- there are other explanations that some philosophers see as more suitable as an explanation for the origin of morality that have more naturalistic or rational justifications, for example virtue theory.
