Correspondence to and you may need to create a new Wiley Online Library account. One might, of course, understand these divine commands as merely God's endorsement of a moral code whose authority is independent of the commands. In rather anthropomorphic language, God desires but does not command that we be perfect. Please check your email for instructions on resetting your password. 1. This is not quite Divine Utilitarianism. Thus we need to consider nested counterfactuals, of the form: ‘If God were not to exist, then if She/He were to exist, ...’. However, I take this to be a conversational implication rather than an entailment. Secondly, we usually reserve the judgement that an act is right for the situation in which all but some narrowly constrained class of acts is wrong. So, of course, the argument is notdeductively valid. We can avoid Moral Perfectionism on this account bynot ignoring weakness of will. The incompatibility between a Divine Command Ethic and moral … Adams, “Moral Arguments for Theistic Belief”Rationality and Religious Belief, ed. Baron is using ‘supererogation’ to apply to acts beyondany requirement of duty, perfect or imperfect. But I disagree. Perhaps the most important such challenge arises in the Platonic dialogue which we read for class today. by C.F. This is recognised as a difficulty for Utilitarianism. 11 0 obj 4 0 obj endobj For a discussion of Kant's concept of an imperfect duty see Marion Baron, ‘Kantian Ethics and Supererogation’,The Journal of Philosophy, 84 (1987), 237–262. If we allow that some duties areimperfect, the definitions do not coincide. One might, of course, understand these divine commands as merely God's endorsement of a moral code … Apart, of course, from the facts, if these are facts, about which acts are right and which wrong. Enter your email address below and we will send you your username, If the address matches an existing account you will receive an email with instructions to retrieve your username, I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of Use, https://doi.org/10.1111/b.9780631201199.1999.00006.x. Can we compare, to take a well-known example, a lesser good for many with a greater good for a few? That is because there are variousuntenable alternatives to the Divine Command Theory which satisfy all four premisses. Learn more about Institutional subscriptions. %��������� PubMed Google Scholar. These do not collapse to indicative conditionals. For God may well choose one plan from a number without that plan being either better or worse than the others. The occurrence of moral dilemmas has often been taken to provide an argument against Moral Realism. See Henry Sidgwick,The Methods of Ethics, Seventh Edition, Macmillan, 1962, p. 221. Derived from Plato's dialogueEuthryphro, in which Socrates asks Euthyphro whether what is loved by the gods is loved because it is holy or holy because it is loved. In other words, “what is in accordance with God’s command is moral and what is contrary to that command is immoral” (Farnell, 2005). Many think that the idea of moral obligations, considered apart from the will of God, simply makes no sense. 162 Divine command theory. Peter Forrest. If you do not receive an email within 10 minutes, your email address may not be registered, endobj Article  Subscription will auto renew annually. Forrest, P. An argument for the Divine Command Theory of Right Action. >> Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. xuO� For example, the theory that the Divine Command Theory holds except for the wrongness of inflicting pain for the fun of it, for which Utilitarianism holds. endstream The third is that I myself would takebeing right to be a property of properties of acts rather than a property. Judaism, Christianity, and Islam share the view that the Hebrew Bible has authority in matters of religion. That is, the theory that to have value is to be approved of by God, to have disvalue is to be disapproved of by Her/Him. endobj �0��+��l���׽�,��Ii+�oq��0���L�0��%��2�{����[@X�a �+���*T�G�.Z�����_>�x}>W>����jM)Q�֢Uo8].e-Zp-`�#թ���?|��������纲7l�ݽ ��:8 Followers of the theory accept that all moral judgment is derived from an understanding of God’s character or his direct commandments. The theory asserts that what is moral is determined by what God commands, and that for a person to be moral is to follow his commands. Here I note three points: The first is that, as an alternative, we could identifybeing right withbeing permitted by God. Learn about our remote access options. Here I assume that there is a finite sum to the numerical values. This is only one possible sense of supererogation. I assume that an act is right just in case it is not wrong. Sophia x�ROHQ��6��A�x�w Both Exodus 20:1–17 and Deuteronomy 5:6–21, which recount the revelation of the Decalogue, portray God as instructing the Chosen People about what they are to do and not to do by commanding them.