Evans' DCT

Question 1

important names to remember

Answer 1

Evans
Wielenberg

Question 2

DCTs aim to explain ___________________ in terms of _____________ or other similar divine states (e.g. ___________; ____________)

Answer 2

features of moral life
divine commands
divine willing; divine desire

Question 3

in this essay I will…

Answer 3

S1 - outline Evans’ DCT
S2 - explain promulgation objection
s3 - evaluate promulgation objection (3 parts)

Question 4

what are the 3 parts of your evaluation section?

Answer 4

1: Evans’ response to promulgation objection
2: Wielenberg’s revival of objection
3: possible response to Wielenberg

Question 5

outline Evans’ DCT:

moral obligations are ____________ to divine commands

Answer 5

identical

Question 6

outline Evans’ DCT:

what type of view is Evans’ DCT?

Answer 6

ontological (about what obligations are)

NOT epistemological (about how we know them)
- people who don’t believe in God can still know their moral obligations
NOT semantic (about what ‘obligation’ means)
- ‘obligation’ doesn’t mean ‘divine command’

Question 7

outline Evans’ DCT:

moral obligations =
divine commands =

Answer 7

Moral obligations = what ‘must’ be done/avoided in a moral sense
- known via conscience, cultural transmission, moral reasoning, divine revelation

Divine commands = God’s expressed will for human persons
- God’s commands can be known/experienced without being known/experienced as God’s commands – e.g. might think something is just an experience of conscience when it’s in fact a divine command

Question 8

outline Evans’ DCT

what features does Evans account for and what does he say about other features?

Answer 8

Evans only aims to account for one feature of moral life in terms of divine commands (obligations)

he presupposes there are other features not accounted for by divine commands (e.g. goodness)

Question 9

what is promulgation?

Answer 9

promulgation = to be made known; for people to be aware of it

Question 10

promulgation objection - premises and conclusion

Answer 10

For anyone to have been given a command, they need to know who has given this command

Many people don’t know God has given them commands

So many people have not been given divine commands

If DCT is true, then God has given everyone commands

T/F, DCT is not true

Question 11

Evaluate promulgation objection: Evans’ response

Answer 11

It’s false that ‘for anyone to have been given a command, they need to know who has given it’

Desert wandering case – on border between two countries, come across warning signs like ‘stay off this land’ – might think it best to follow these commands, even though you don’t know who is giving them to you because you don’t know where you are

Question 12

Evaluate promulgation objection: Wielenberg’s revival

Answer 12

Need to replace P1 in the promulgation objection with ‘for anyone to be given a command, they need to know they’ve been given a command’

Don’t need to know who has given the command

Question 13

Evaluate promulgation objection: possible response to Wielenberg

Answer 13

Weilenberg was writing after Evans so Evans didn’t actually respond, but would likely have said something like:

You do know you’ve been given a command (e.g. ‘hear’ the command via voice of conscience), just don’t know who’s giving it to us

Question 14

conclusion

Answer 14

promulgation objection fails against Evans’ DCT

Evans’ response deals with the objection effectively – as in the desert wandering case, every-day experience supports his argument that you don’t need to know who a command is from to know you’ve been given one (e.g. wet paint)

Wielenberg’s attempt at reviving the promulgation objection also fails again in part because we can site every-day experience of conscience and ‘gut feelings’ as giving us commands of sorts

Question 15

title of Evans’ paper

Answer 15

God and Moral Obligation

Question 16

title of Wielenberg’s paper

Answer 16

Robust ethics : the metaphysics and epistemology of godless normative realism