What´s Divine Command Theory Possible?

617 Words2 Pages

The Divine command theory is a metaethical theory which states that an action is obligatory if and only if, it is commanded by God. In this essay, I shall examine whether any form of divine command theory is defensible. I shall begin by looking at the modified theory as proposed by Robert Adams, who is a defender of this position. Secondly, I will attempt to assess objections from Plato, Kant, Leibniz and Aquinas; before proceeding to evaluate whether these objections are successful in demeaning the divine command theory.

Robert Adams (1987) proposed a modified version of the divine command theory in an attempt to defend the original view. He asserted that an action is morally wrong, if and only if, it defies the will of an omnibenevolent God. He argued that ethical wrongness is not purely based on what God commands, but rather in the attributes that God possesses. We can take the example of person X murdering person Y. This will be seen as an ethically wrong act, irrespective of what the magistrate may conclude. …show more content…

In a dialogue between Socrates and Euthyphro; Socrates poses the question that if acts are right if God commands them, then is it that a) God commands an action because it is morally good or b) is it that the action is morally good because God commands it?. Consequently, If we were to take the first answer, then morally good acts would be seen as existing prior to and independently of a God commanding them. This is because we would believe that there is a fixed set of morally right acts and they are right regardless of a God commanding them. We can illustrate this by looking at torture. This would not be wrong merely because God asserts that it is wrong, but because it is intrinsically wrong. It is wrong regardless of whether a God exists or not. In effect, this would defeat the divine command theory which repeatedly stresses that morality is dependent on a

Open Document