100% (1)
Pages:
6 pages/≈1650 words
Sources:
0
Style:
APA
Subject:
Religion & Theology
Type:
Essay
Language:
English (U.S.)
Document:
MS Word
Date:
Total cost:
$ 23.76
Topic:

Divine Command Theory and the Euthyphro Dilemma it Faces

Essay Instructions:

What is divine command theory? What is the ‘Euthyphro dilemma’ that it faces? What do you think is the best way for the defender of the divine command theory to respond, and why? How well does that response fare?

Explain cultural relativism. Drawing on lecture and the Rachels article, what do you take to be the biggest objection(s) to it? (You can discuss several, or narrow your focus to look at one or two in depth.) Does the cultural relativist have plausible responses to these objections? Or perhaps: can the view be modified to avoid these objections? Why or why not?

Explain act utilitarianism, rule utilitarianism, and the differences between them. Which do you think is the better version of utilitarianism, and why?

Kant claims that we ought to act

only according to maxims that are universalizable,

only in ways that treat people as ends, not just as means, and

always with the intention of following the above two principles.

Explain each of these three ideas. Then explore them by means of an example of your choosing, with the goal of critically evaluating Kant’s position. Do you think Kant’s view delivers the correct answer about what we ought to do in your example? Why or why not? (Be sure to be clear about which theme from Kant is relevant where.) If you are going to claim that Kant has gone wrong somewhere, be as clear as you can about what you think he has ignored or left out. If you are going to claim that Kant is right, you should pick a case that looks problematic for him, and argue that it in fact is not problematic.

Nagel points out that we sometimes hold people morally responsible for outcomes that are to a large extent outside their control. He calls this phenomenon “moral luck”, and claims that it is puzzling, even paradoxical. 1. Explain this phenomenon, and provide an example or two. 2. Explain why it is puzzling, and why the puzzle seems hard to dissolve. 3. What do you think is the best response to it? Is there a way to dissolve it after all? Why or why not?

Peter Singer thinks that we are morally obligated to give significant amounts of money to famine relief (and other) charities. Why does he think this? Spell out his reasoning clearly and carefully. Do you think he’s right? Why or why not? (If you are going to argue that he’s wrong, note that you must respond to his argument.) Whichever side you take, be sure to consider possible objections, and note that your answer should include as much detail in the “why” part as possible.

ok. You can choose the topic you like and could you tell me some brainstorm before tomorrow. And I will be appreciated.

Essay Sample Content Preview:

Divine Command Theory
Student's Name
Institution
Course
Professor's Name
Date
Divine Command Theory
Divine Command Theory is based on a theistic framework. It claims that morality is dependent on God and that moral obligation is anchored in obedience to God's commands. This shows that the divine command theory argues that morality is based on the character of God and his command and that the morally right actions are those commanded or required by God. Different religions hold different views and beliefs about the divine command theory based on religious beliefs and practices. The common thing is that these various religions believe is that God is the author of morality. However, the most significant debate in the contemporary world is the connection between religion and morality. This debate further generates another discussion about the role of religion in society and its moral deliberation nature. Evidently, other people are likely to oppose while others support the divine command theory. This theory's Euthyphro dilemma is whether morally right actions are right because God commands them or whether God commands them because they are right.
The modern moral philosophy borrows a lot from the divine command theory. The conception of ethics always conforms to the virtues of the divine command theory. Words like "ought" and "should" are widely accepted in legal contexts and courts. The two words were borrowed from Christianity, linking religion and morality. The link between religion and morality made philosophical discussions about God and ethics, including the divine command theory, invoke the dialogue between Socrates and Euthyphro. Socrates asks Euthyphro: "Is the pious loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is loved by the gods?"
In the divine command theory, the Euthyphro dilemma would be, "Does God command this particular action because it is morally right, or is it morally right because God commands it?" The best way for a divine theory defender to answer this dilemma is in two ways. The first is that God commands actions because they are morally right, and the second answer to the dilemma question is that an action is morally right because God commands it. Therefore, the divine command has to express God's reason for it to be recognized as divine law. However, God's reason can only be witnessed and put into action through human reason. This means that human reason is significant in interpreting the divine command and the truths behind them. For example, God commands people not to kill because killing is not good and is likely to cause instability. On the contrary, killing a person to end their suffering is better than letting them die naturally. This is true in the case of a person suffering from a terminal condition like cancer in its advanced stage where the person has narrow or no survival chances.
The implication in the second answer to the Euthyphro dilemma is that everything is good because God commands it. For example, the 5th commandment prohibits people from killing, but God commanded Abraham to sacrifice his son in Exodus 22:2. God also allows the Pharisees to kill Jesus to fulfill the ancient prophecies in the New Testament. These two examples would mean that God approves of inflicting pain and suffering on other people, an assumption that distorts the divine command theory's claim and intention. It would mean that God commands morality, thus making it arbitrary, which then legalizes injustices in some cases, as seen in the case of Abraham and his son in the Old Testament and Jesus in the New Testament.
Therefore, the first answer helps avoid the implication that cruelty could be right by arguing that God commands actions because they are morally right. Arguing that God commands actions because they are morally right saves defenders of divine command theory from the arbitrariness problem. It also breaks the allusion that everything God commands is right, meaning that God is not the author of ethics and that He does not define what is right or wrong. This alludes that God only approves what is right or wrong but does not author them as divine command theorists believe. It may also insinuate that God does not serve as the foundation of ethics and that He is not sovereign. However, this is wrong because God remains sovereign in the New and Old Testaments, despite giving conflicting orders. This means that God commands o...
Updated on
Get the Whole Paper!
Not exactly what you need?
Do you need a custom essay? Order right now:
Sign In
Not register? Register Now!