Divine Command Theory And The Euthyphro Dilemma

Question 1

Divine command theory

Answer 1

God(s) have commanded certain things

What God commands should be done

What God commands plays an important part in what we do (if we believe in God)

Question 2

Divine commands

Answer 2

God commands that F be done

What God commands ought be done

Therefore F ought be done

Question 3

Divind commands: sources

Answer 3

How do we come to know that God commands F?

• Revelation
• Natural reasons – Hobbes, Aquinas

Revelation as a source
- Depends on the interpretation of Revelation
- Who interprets it?
• If someone other than me interprets it, how do I interpret them?

Reason as a source
- Command known by reason is similar to a claim to conscience
• F must be done because God commands it
• F must be done because conscience commands it
• What if people disagree about fundamental moral tenet? E.g. Homosexuality
- Commands insufficient?
• Commands (or rules of any kind) are insufficient as a source of morality
• They must be interpreted first
• They must be applied
– Application is difficult
– Must decide which rules apply
– Must decide if the situation is an exception to rule

Why obey God’s commands??
• God is good, therefore his commands are good
• What God commands will lead to human flourishing
• God is to be feared
• Don’t we have to know God is good to have reason to obey him??

Question 4

Euthyphro

Answer 4

Euthyphro is a lawyer whose father has killed a peasant. Euthyphro is prosecuting him

Socrates tried to convince him now to prosecute his father.

Key argument: “Is an action pious because the Gods command it, or do the Gods command it because it is pious?”
- Good because God commands it, or God commands it because it is good??
• Both concepts are unpleasant
• Good because God commands it:
– God could command genocide and forbid love
• God commands it because it is good:
– Some standard of goodness independent of God
– This removes the need for a God – why bother with a God if goodness can be known independently??

Euthyphro’s side of the argument is more difficult to sustain
• He believes in many Gods, some of whom may disagree
- The argument applies to the case of a single God, or any moral authority at all – even conscience.

Good because God commands it
- Historically, option preferred by those who made God’s sovereignty the focus
• William of Ockham (1288-1347)
• God is absolutely free to command anything, and could have commanded differently had he so chosen
• Islamic theology – Al-Ghazali

God commands what is good
- Aquinas
• We can know what is right without reference to God
• It follows human nature
• God simply helps us – God stops us being deceived into thinking evil acts are good

Scotus
• God could only have commanded what he did
• But as he is God, he can allow exceptions from the moral law

If we should only do what God commands if God is good – we must have a concept of goodness independent of God

Isn’t God’s goodness derived from goodness in general??
• So does God decide to be good? Could just as easily decide not to be good
• If so – isn’t God’s command superfluous at best, as God can decide to command good or bad deeds, as God can decide what constitutes Good

Question 5

God and Goodness

Answer 5

Isn’t “God is good” synthetic??

God could turn out not to be good

Many philosophers and theologians resist this sentiment – saying God is necessarily good

His commands are necessarily good therefore must be done

Can God be proven to be necessarily good? and what does it mean to be good in this context??

Question 6

Moral autonomy

Answer 6

Doesn’t God commanding us undermine out own moral autonomy? (Kant)

• Morality ought to become free of an appeal to authority
• Morality ought to be about thinking things out for myself
• I don’t act morally until I come to see on my own terms that something is to be done or avoided

If I believe god commanded F do I then have a personal reason to do F??
- The reason should be your personal understanding of why F should be done, not simply an argument/command from authority that it be done
- Is this anything other than a prejudice against authority??
• Most knowing is based on what is known from some form of authority

Aquinas 
- God commands what is good
- Goodness is rooted in the kind of creatures we are
    • This can be known without God
- God makes us this kind of creature

Aquinas and God’s commands
- God commands what is good
- This is based on what we are
- Which is established by God
- So God is the only standard of Goodness
- Goodness is conditional for humans
• Given that humans are creatures of God, and given a knowledge of goodness by God, we should do Good, which is as God commands and has decided

If that is so – goodness can be known independently of a belief of God – can be created by God but not believe in a God
- So why bother with a God and worship of one?

Question 7

Geach’s claim (Euthyphro again)

Answer 7

Geach’s claim
- Modern philosophy is too kind to Socrates
- Euthyphro cannot be dissuaded by Socrates’ arguments
- Someone has been done cruelly to death, and the fact that it is his father is immaterial
- Surely the God’s hate murder, whatever Socrates has to say about it

Consequences of such a claim
- Many people may see something as wrong – e.g. lying
- Only someone who believes God has commanded us not to do it has an absolutist relation to it
• Only a religious person can then say “I will never do evil that good may come”

Doing evil that good may come

• Some things have such awful consequences that we may break absolute prohibitions on acts – e.g. torture and terrorism/bomb location argument
• I may believe something is wrong, but will I stick to personal beliefs regardless of the consequences?? Kant’s moral duties link to this
• If I believe God has commanded this, then yes, I shall stick to such beliefs