






Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Community
Ask the community for help and clear up your study doubts
Discover the best universities in your country according to Docsity users
Free resources
Download our free guides on studying techniques, anxiety management strategies, and thesis advice from Docsity tutors
Divine Command Theory is a normative ethical theory with two parts.
Typology: Slides
1 / 10
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!
A. Introduction
A. Introduction
(DCT2) An act-token X performed by person P at time T is morally right if and only if X is what God commands or desires P to do at time T. (Part dealing with the normative ethics of behavior.)
If God wished me to do that at this time, then it was.
If God didn't want me to do that at that time, then it wasn't.
Morality is nothing more nor less than God's pronouncements, commands and attitudes.
In short, if an action is right, it is right because God commands it.
It is not God's commandments that make actions right or things good.
Instead, it is because they are right or good that God commands or approves of them.
a) God's commands and attitudes are themselves completely arbitrary. * Whatever God commands or approves of is right.
b) If God commands me to donate $1000 to the Amherst Survival Center on Easter Sunday, then that is morally right.
However, if God commands me to rape, torture and mutilate my four year old cousin on Easter Sunday, then that is morally right.
c) Another problem: what do we mean by "God is good”?
Does it just mean "God approves of God”?
Doesn’t it mean something more than this?
d) Analogy: call something "schmood" if and only if Martha Stewart approves of it.
Obviously, Martha Stewart herself is schmood.
If “good” is like “schmood”, why should I care about “good” things more than “schmood” things?
a) Something else besides God makes things good or bad or actions right or wrong
b) Doesn’t actually show Weak DCT to be false.
c) However, it seems that ethical theory, or moral philosophy, should concern itself with the something else that is more fundamental in morality
d) God’s commandments or scriptures at most a handy guide to help us figure things out that we could figure out other ways.
We would need to know what God actually commands or desires us to do.
Many people think it is possible, directly or indirectly.
But no one thinks it is always easy and straightfoward.
Which one is right?
Often take the form of stories or parables, not general criteria for rightness or wrongness.
There are some exceptions.
I’m going to focus on two strands from Judeo-Christian tradition.
(1) “You shall have no other gods before me.”
(2) “You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments.”
(3) “You shall not misuse the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses his name.
a) Don the lucky Drunk Driver. (Leads to an argument:)
P1. If 10C is true, then Don's act of driving with a blood alcohol level of 0.40 was morally right.
P2. Don's act of driving with a blood alcohol level of 0.40 was not morally right.
C. Therefore, 10C is not true.
b) Other examples: child pornography, internet spamming, public urination, vandalism
a) working on the Sabbath to have the money to feed your family
b) stealing from the rich to give to the poor
Perhaps best to replace them with more general principles that preserve what seems right about them.
"In everything, do unto others what you would have them do unto you." (Matthew 7:12)
(GR) An act-token X performed by person P at time T is morally right if and only if, in performing X, P does not treat anyone else in a way that P would not want that person to treat P.
a) Consider Pete the Pervert, who loves groping strangers and being groped by strangers.
P1. If GR is true, then Pete's act of groping Grandma Betty at the Holyoke Mall was morally right. P2. Pete's act of groping Grandma Betty at the Holyoke Mall was not morally right. C. Therefore, GR is not true.
b) Other examples involving people imposing their own likes and preferences on other people.
a) A doctor who is herself allergic to penicillin but uses penicillin to treat her patients.
b) A hair stylist who gives a customer a haircut that the customer asks for but the hair stylist himself would not want.
Sheds light on connection between God and morality to consider what would be different if there were no God.
I’ll consider two arguments that answer no to this question.
Read the papers by Mavrodes and Nielsen in your book for a more detailed examination of this issue.
c) Perhaps there is karma, or "what goes around comes around", even if there is no God. (This calls P1 into question.)
d) Perhaps acting rightly is "its own reward", and we don't need any other motivation. (This calls P2 into question.)
e) Perhaps there is still a difference between right and wrong whether or not any one has any motivation to act rightly. (This calls P3 into question.)