More handpicked essays just for you.
Strengths and weakness of divine command theory
Divine command theory principles
Divine command theory principles
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Your post is thought provoking and offers a unique prospective of how one can combine Virtue Ethics and Divine Command Theory to explain the manner in which one can determine the standards of an action. In agreement with your view, author of philosophical and religious work, Stephan Evans, states that the “Divine Command Theory is consistent with reasonable forms of Virtue Ethics because virtues are thought to provide a goal of moral obligation “(Evans, 2014, 53). Nevertheless, there are contrasting elements. Divine Theory focusses on the act itself, while Virtue Ethics is only concerned with the individual carrying out the action. Aristotle states that people discover what the Golden Mean for a particular virtue is and act according to it by …show more content…
For this reason, Virtue Ethics is considered by some to be a viable theory in understanding the moral conduct and character of a person. Virtue Ethics has also stated that an act or choice is morally right if the individual carrying out the act exercises exhibits or develops a morally virtuous character. Moreover, an act or decision is immoral if the individual enacting it exerts, displays, or acquires a virtuously immoral character. However, it does not take into account ethical duties, a standard of rules, or the consequences of a particular action. In addition, it does not include a general agreement that defines what the virtues are; it is also possible that any list of virtues could be relative to the culture establishing them. In contrast to Virtue Ethics, the Divine Command Theory advocates for strict adherence to God’s Law. It states that God is the ultimate arbiter of what constitutes morality and that without Him; there is no clear way
Virtue ethics is an approach that “deemphasizes rules, consequences and particular acts and places the focus on the kind of person who is acting” (Garrett, 2005). A person’s character is the totality of his character traits. Our character traits can be goo...
In this essay I will consider the objections to Virtue Ethics (VE) raised by Robert Louden in his article entitled On Some Vices of Virtue Ethics which was published in 1984. It is important to note at the outset of this essay that it was not until 1991 that the v-rules came up in literature. So Louden is assuming throughout his article that the only action guidance that VE can give is “Do what the virtuous agent would do in the circumstances.” I will be addressing Louden’s objections with the benefit of knowing about the v-rules. First of all, let us discuss what VE is. VE is a normative ethical theory that emphasises the virtues or moral character, thus it focuses on the moral agent. It differs from Deontology which emphasises duties or rules, and Utilitarianism which emphasises the consequences of our actions.
Broadly, the divine command theory is a religious moral code in which God’s commands determine what human beings should or should not do. As such, it is expected for theists to subscribe to the divine command theory of morality. The deontological interpretation of the divine command theory separates actions into one of the following categories: mandatory for human beings to perform, prohibited for human beings to perform, or optional for human beings to perform. Those actions that are mandatory to perform are ones which have been expressly commanded by God. Failing to commit a mandatory action would be defying God’s commands, and thus, according to the divine command theory of morality, immoral. Actions that are prohibited are ones that God expressly commands human beings do not perform. Consequently, to perform a prohibited action would be immoral. Finally, those actions that God does not expressly command that human beings should perform or should avoid performing are optional; there are no moral implications to performing or not performing such acts. The rightness or wrongness of an action is inherently and wholly dependent upon th...
Aristotle's ethics consist of a form of virtue ethics, in which the ethical action is that which properly complies with virtue(s) by finding the mean within each particular one. Aristotle outlines two types of virtues: moral/character virtues and intellectual virtues. Though similar to, and inspired by, Plato and Socrates’ ethics, Aristotle's ethical account differs in some areas.
Given that the nature of virtue ethics makes it relatively impossible to effectively evaluate the morality of people’s actions, it is still used as an argument to refute the possibility
The Divine Command Theory is an ethical theory that basically proposes that God is the sole distinguisher between what is right and what is wrong. The textbook describes that under this theory, God commands what is moral and forbids what is immoral. Critics of this theory state that if God is the sole decision maker of morality, immoral actions could be acceptable if He willed it, and thus, God’s authority would be subjective and arbitrary. However, proponents contend that God would not allow immoral actions because he is omnipotent and all good. To follow the Divine Command Theory, one must believe and trust that it is in God’s nature to do good, and He will not act against his nature. By believing in this, one would dispute the critics’ argument by proving that God his not making
Hursthouse, R. (2003, July 18). Virtue Ethics. Stanford University. Retrieved March 6, 2014, from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2013/entries/ethics-virtue
The Divine Command theory of ethics is a theory that states that an act is right or wrong and good or bad based on whether or not God commands or prohibits us from doing it. This means that the only thing that makes an action morally wrong is because God says it is. There are two sides to this theory; the restricted and the unrestricted. The restricted theory basically says that an action is obligatory if and only if it is good and God commanded it; the unrestricted theory states that an act is only obligatory if it is commanded by God, it is not obligatory if it is prohibited by God and it is optional if and only if God has not commanded nor prohibited it.
The concept of virtue ethics was first developed by Aristotle in 'nichomachean ethics '. He believed that the point of ethics is to become good, and virtue ethics highlights this well. It is an agent centred idea of morality and focuses on how a person can develop virtues and what sort of person you should be, rather than how you should act in order to be good. An alternative name for it is aretaic ethics, which comes from the Greek arete meaning any kind of excellence.
In order to understand divine command theory we must first understand the nature of God and Morality. So we will start by taking a look at what makes an action moral. Once we understand what makes an action moral, we can then try to understand the author's’ viewpoint on the divine command theory of ethics. Understanding the viewpoint will allow us to dissect the author’s viewpoints and come up with counter-arguments that the author must then contend with.
This theory involves evaluating the individual making the decision rather than the actions or consequences themselves. Aristotle defined “virtue as a character trait that manifests itself in habitual actions.” (Boatright, 2012) This means that you are not considered virtuous because you did the right thing one time, you must be consistent. Virtue character traits include: compassion, courage, courtesy, etc. these traits not only allow for ethical decision making but they also provide happiness to the individual possessing the traits. When a person has virtue as a part of their character their actions will be moral and ethical without having to choose between what they want to do and what they should do – the decision would be the same. Their actions and feelings would coincide with the moral rationale of the virtue theory. Advantages of the virtue theory are instilling good moral character traits into individuals allowing for more ethical decision making based on personal character. Also, the virtue theory promotes happiness through good moral character which encourages people to make ethical business decisions but also ethical personal decisions – leading to a more fulfilling life. A disadvantage is virtue ethics is trying to determine a list of virtues that people should possess, each trait needs to be carefully
As mentioned by Thiroux & Krasemann, expresses how the establishment of virtues is based on the measurement of righteous perceptions (72). For instance, as a society we know mainly through trial and error what type of moral codes to develop. Many people undergo errors of society and we established what is common sense because of it. Therefore, virtue ethics isn’t solely on notions to project a list of rules in order to be a decent human being, but to apply these basic principles to how we feel as well (Thiroux & Krasemann, pg.78).
It has more to do with character and the nature of what it is to be. human, than with the rights and wrongs of our actions. Instead of concentrating on what is the right thing to do, virtue ethics asks how. you can be a better person. Aristotle says that those who do lead a virtuous life, are very happy and have a sense of well-being.
The Theory of Natural Law, defined in three aspects, there being a natural order in the world, everything having a purpose and how things are and how things ought to be. This theory also states that humans can distinguish between what is right or wrong through human reason/moral knowledge. On the other hand, the Divine Command Theory is a view of morality and believes that what’s right or wrong is set by God’s moral commands. God’s commands tell us what is morally obligatory, permitted and wrong.
Virtue is such an abstract concept that it is impossible for individuals or even societies as a whole to clearly and unequivocally define it, so there must be some form of a higher authority capable of defining human virtues tout court in order for such a thing to even exist. Because of the impact one's environment can have on his or her belief system there is a wide range of conflicting ideas regarding human virtue around the globe, which indicates that no intrinsic definition of human virtues exists for humans. Therefore, human beings alone are only able to speculate as to the nature of human virtue that cannot serve as concrete standards people must live up to as opinions generally do not have enough certainty to function as definitions. Thus, there must be a non-human higher power that outlines what is and is not thought to be excellent for all human beings, regardless of age, race, gender, or belief system.