The Divine Command Theory
The Divine Command Theory states that whatever God says is so, simply because God said so. Meaning X is morally right because God says so and Y is morally wrong because God says so. This theory states that things are wrong or right simply because God says, not because of what we consider to be morally right or wrong, but just because of what God says. One argument that goes against the Divine Command Theory is the right becomes wrong argument. Example: If the DCT is true, then if God said that rape was morally permissible, then it would be, but the issue is that even if God were to suddenly say “rape is alright,” rape is objectively wrong, therefor the DCT would be false. People argue “God would never say rape is morally permissible” which poses the question, why would God never say that? Most people would respond with “Because it’s wrong” which is a contradiction to the DCT, whatever God says is wrong because he says so, not because it just is. Another argument against the DCT is the Fixity argument. The Fixity argument states that morality is fixed, but if the DCT were true then morality would not be fixed. What is right/wrong stays that way forever, regardless of what God says is so. For example, we consider it wrong to kill a person, but what if God were to say it was okay to kill a person now? Did morality change just because God said so or is it still morally wrong to kill a person? Would we feel different about committing the act because God gave us permission to? My favorite argument against the DCT is the Goodness of God argument which states that if the DCT is true then the phrase “God is good” because meaningless. When people say “God is good” they’re usually referring to something good that has happened to them and in a way thanking God for being good to them, which would in turn mean that God does good things to some people, but bad things to other people which in turn disproves the Divine Command Theory. Furman,...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document