Divine Command Theory

What is it?

the theory that what makes something morally right is that God commands it, and what makes something morally wrong is that God forbids it

Euthyphro Dilemma

this dilemma comes from Plato's dialogue that shows Socrates discussing morality with Euthyphro as they sit outside the Greek courthouse and await their own fates

The dilemma begins by posing a question: 'Are morally good acts willed by God because they are morally good, or are they morally good because they are willed by God?'

These two questions are each called a 'horn'

if one answers with the first horn, then they face the independence problem that if morally good acts are willed by god because they are good, then they were good independently of God's willing them

This would imply that God did not create the rules of morality, and thus that he did not create everything. This would imply he is not omnipotent

if one chooses the second horn, there are a few more problems:

The Arbitrariness Problem

the arbitrariness problem is the problem that DCT bases morality on mere whims of God, and not on a set system. Whims, though, even God's whims, are not an adequate foundation for morality.

We must also ask how God chooses what to command? If morality depends on God's decision what to command, then God's decision what to command cannot be informed by morality.

Thus, his decisions are morally arbitrary

However, Divine Command Theorists may respond by stating that God's commands are based on a number of things, for example what is best for us or concern for our well-being. Thus, morality is not just based on whims.

The Emptiness Problem

this problem is one that analyses statements like 'God is good' and claims they are merely empty tautologies

Statements like this, if we accept divine command theory, are rendered empty and trivial as 'god is good' is merely 'god is as he wills himself to be'

But, to a theist, it is through these claims that God is worthy of worship, and so if they are now trivial, how can he be?

However, a rebuttal could be that God's goodness is different from human goodness and that divine command theory is only an analysis of human goodness, not that of God's

The Problem of Abhorrent Commands

this problem is that divine command theory seems to mean that if god were to command abhorrent deception, cruelty or unnecessary violence, these acts would become morally good

Robert Adams Modified DCT

he argued that morality is not arbitrary because it is rooted in God's omnibenevolent nature

God's commands are rooted in his perfect nature

Pluralism Objection

The plurality of religions and the plurality of interpretations of 'divine commands' within a religion provides serious difficulties for any theory that sees divine commands as the basis for ethical right and wrong.

Basically, ethics is subjective

Gottfried Leibniz

argued against DCT with two main points

if goodness is solely what god commands then it has no intrinsic value, someone may do something just because god has commanded it, not because it is a good deed

if god wills one person to do one thing and wills another person to do the opposite, then both acts, despite being contrary, would be morally good. Makes no sense.

Strengths

fits idea that god is benevolent

fits idea that god is creator

emphasises virtue of obedience which christians see as a good thing