max douglas intro to philosophy

7/30/2019 Max Douglas intro to philosophy

1/6

Max Douglas

Cliff Hill

Philosophy

Divine Command Theory

Over the years people have wondered what it is to be ethical. People ask themselves questions

like, What is good? Who is good? What is the right choice? Many of the ethical theories satisfy these

questions, but their outcomes and methods of getting there vary greatly. Im going to explain why and

how divine command theory laid the foundation for modern ethics, and why it is still one of the most

influential and thorough ethical theories to date.

First, I will give a brief description of what divine command theory is and how to apply it.

Second, I will argue the importance of the all-powerful property of God. Next, I will argue for the

importance of starting our ethical theory from an epistemological point of view. Fourth, I will make an

argument that everything has a beginning, starting with a creator. Then, I will make an argument against

the Euthyphro problem. Finally, we will test an example to see how divine command theory and other

ethical theories deal with a certain problem.

Developed by St. Thomas Aquinas, divine command theory is built around the concept that

there is a God who developed all ethical truths. When most people think of God they think God is

mysterious, and is someone or something that cant be grasped. Humans have done their best to apply

human properties to a God that presumably cant be defined in human terms. In many religions it is

taught that God has revealed their holy scripture, and these holy scriptures are where many religious

men and women get their ethical views. Right away I hope we notice that divine command theory can

be dangerous. It seems anyone can claim God is angry with an enemy, and that is why we are justified in

killing them. Or someone can get away quoting scripture to justify why the killed another person. We


2/6

would think these people have gone mad, and yet at face value their ethical theories seem towork! Im

going to begin by discussing some properties of God, and how we can be justified in believing these

properties.

This God contains three major properties: omnipotence (all-powerful), omniscient (all-knowing),

and omnibenevolent (all-good). The omnipotence of God is one of the major concepts to understand

when discussing divine command theory. An all-powerful God means to have a God who has control

over everything, who always knows what is happening, and who is able to intervene or reform at any

time (just to name a few). While these properties of God dont seem to be obvious when you get up

every day, there are some sound arguments for an all-powerful God.

One might say that God does not have control over everything because if God did have control

over everything then people wouldnt be murdered and people starving. While this seems like an

argument that would trump a God that is only all-good, a God that is all-powerful seems to be able to

elude this. God out of his power has given mankind freewill, and therefore the results of our own deeds

usually result in good or bad situations. One also might say that God does not know what is happening

because if he did then he would help those who are suffering. In the power of God, God allows suffering

because suffering can bring us joy from others. Therefore, one way God expresses his powerful love is to

allow suffering. If you broke your leg and went to the hospital your family would likely show up and help

you, and if your family didnt show up then the doctors or nurses most likely would.

This omnipotence of God seems to satisfy some of these questions, but how do we know we can

apply the properties of God to these certain circumstances? How do we know that its not just by chance

that good things come from bad? How do we know if we have freewill, or how do we evenknow if its a

good thing or not? To apply divine command theory takes several steps. It doesnt seem valid to say that

we should believe in an all-powerful God just because God is all-powerful! This is when knowledge by


3/6

description and knowledge by acquaintance work well together. Russell claimed that knowledge by

description and knowledge by acquaintance are the only ways to prove that God exists. It is now up to

the ethicist to put the pieces together to find if he or she already knows an all-powerful God by applying

the properties of God to their own ethical circumstances.

To help you along this process I think its important to always start from an epistemologic al

point of view. I see evidence to support that we should always start our ethical theories by asking the

questions, How do we know anything exists at all? In our case it would be appropriate to ask the

question, How do we know ethics exist at all? IfCcauses B and B causes A then what caused C?

Everything has a cause, therefore there is an infinite regress of causes, or something caused the chain.

An infinite regress is impossible, therefore something caused the chain. This argument is water tight,

and it is known at the Cosmological Argument. The next step is to find what caused the chain. An all-

powerful God fits the description pretty well, but there are other possible causes. It is not right to justify

from ignorance, so just because science has not found the very beginning of time, does not mean God is

automatically the missing piece to the puzzle (or the puzzle to the piece, whichever you prefer). It may

take some time before scientists discover with conclusive evidence how our world came to be, so in the

mean time it seems we are justified in speculating.

Given the need for a first cause, here are some arguments that might prove God was the

creator, the first cause, and therefore was the creator of ethical truths. God was the first being and

created the world, and God developed mankind, therefore the ethics that mankind has used from the

beginning is derived from God. This seems to hold up, but its hard to derive eth ical facts from God

through man, and reasoning like this can lead to farfetched ethical truths. If you believe in any of the

major modern religions, and we stop relying solely on reasoning and logic we could use the argument,

God was the first being and created the world, God developed mankind, God sent prophets to reveal


4/6

ethical facts, therefore God revealed ethical facts through prophets All the major religions of the world

seem to have well developed ethical theories that derive from God revealing them in one way or

another. I have brought up the spiritual aspect of divine command theory because we will have to

address it in the Euthyphro Problem.

The Euthyphro Problem is stated as such, Jack committed murder, therefore Jack committed a

wrong act. The Euthyphro problem wants us to take two options to this statement; either (A) God

created this ethical fact, or (B) God did not make ethical facts. If we accept (A) then we must say that

God has made murder obligatory, and therefore can make it obligatory again. If we accept (B) then we

have to give up the all-powerful property of God. If we take (A) that God made ethical facts, and

therefore has made murder obligatory (according to the Christian Old Testament), then it would be right

for us to later take a counterexample from the Christian Bible. (A) is referring to is when God ordered

thousands of men and women to be slaughtered because they disobeyed Him. To get caught up in

theology would result in skepticism, but speaking purely from a standpoint of religious beliefs, many

religions believe that God was incarnated into human form becoming human and God at the same time.

If these religions are correct in saying God was incarnated then we would be justified in believing that

these are the closest ethical facts we will receive from God. If we take a counterexample of the Christian

Bible, The New Testament, we can see that Jesus, who is the last prophet, abolished many of the old

ethical standards God had set for the Israelites in the Old Testament. Since Jesus was the last prophet

there are no more ethical truths to be revealed from God that havent already been revealed. So to say

that God could make murder obligatory would go against Jesus and Christianity, Mohammad and Islam,

Buddha and Buddhism, and many more mainstream religions because their ethical truths have been

revealed in full.


5/6

If we took option (B) that God did not make ethical facts, and therefore is not all powerful we

would have to completely give up on divine command theory. Not only would God lose evidence for the

possibility ofbeing the first cause, but to say God didnt create ethical facts we would have to adopt

another ethical view such as Utilitarianism, or Intuitionism. In response to the Euthyphro problem we

would have to get in a theological debate to keep divine command theory because right away the

Euthyphro problem questions Gods all-good property. As we can see the Euthyphro problem is a weak

attempt to raise skepticism on the reasoning and logic of divine command theory.

Although divine command theory was originally developed by Christian scholars, divine

command theory in its most simple form can be used by Hindus, Muslims, Buddhists, Christians, and

more. Those who adopt divine command theory also often have the drive to believe in an afterlife which

will cause them to make more ethically wise choices. Other than some misconceptions in the Islam faith,

divine command theory seems ethical when compared to the other ethical theories whereas the other

ethical theories do not stand as well when compared to divine command theory.

Lets take a brief example. Lets say you get in the car, turn on the radio, and start listening to

music that is of someone bragging about robbing people and shooting guns. A divine command theorist

would say that this act of listening to the music is unethical because it is against the ethical truths God

has left with us. Egoism would state that all our ethical facts should be directed toward self interest and

if we feel happy when listening to that kind of music then we can listen to it, and Hedonism would have

a similar response. In social contract theory you would implicitly be saying yes to listen to the music

even if youre somewhat unaware of what the lyrics mean. Intuitionism would escape this because, as it

is obvious to most us, listening to someone brag about robbing people and shooting guns is ethically

wrong. This is just one example of divine command theory being ethical in the modern world whereas

other ethical theories would have to adopt new rules.


6/6

Divine command theory is the ethical theory that God has given us all of our ethical truths in one

way or another. The arguments in favor of divine command theory are always valid, although, because

there is a lack of scientific proof, the arguments are not as sound as some of the other ethical theories.

Ultimately divine command theory needs to continue to make advancements in the modern age to stay

up to date with the other ethical theories. Divine command theory is not a simple way of explaining

ethics, its actually very difficult and it takes several steps. Divine command theory was one of the

dominating philosophies for a long period of time, and I believe it will be again someday.

max douglas intro to philosophy

Documents