Divine Command Theory

840 Words 4 Pages
Wait squirrel! You cannot steal those acorns, they are not yours. The idea that it is morally right to steal because that is what your god wants is called Divine Command Theory. Divine Command Theory says that “An act is morally required because it is commanded by god, and immoral just because god forbids it.”(Shafer-Landau, 67) One premise of Divine Command Theory is that for a valid moral law to be created the creator must be perfect, because imperfect beings would make mistakes. I am not sold on the idea that imperfection cannot make perfection. Let’s take a look at when a different set of laws and codes were being drafted. The first amendment to the United States Constitution gives its people the right to freedom of speech, press, religion, …show more content…
This perfect law was created by a group of imperfect men. This is possible through the idea of synergy. A group working together can accomplish much more than the sum of the individuals would. Therefore, the creator of a valid moral code does not have to be a perfect god. Another issue with Divine Command Theory is that it is impossible to determine whether or not god actually exists, and if he does exist, does he command humanity at all. (Shafer-Landau) Another flaw in Devine command theory is explained by Shafer-Landau thru his description of The Euthyphro Argument. He summarizes the argument by saying that god may or may not have reasons for his moral code. If god has reasons for his moral code, than those reasons are what make actions moral or immoral, which disproves Divine Command Theory. If god has no reasons for his moral code then his moral code is random, causing his moral code to lack credibility. (Shafer-Landau) Due to these reasons Divine Command Theory is false and you should not steal those …show more content…
Squirrel stop! This nihilistic view that you have adopted can be even more dangerous than Divine Command Theory. To live one’s life with the belief that there are no moral truths can be dangerous. The metaethical view that I agree with is known as Cultural Relativism. This view states that “moral standards are relative to cultures or societies.” (Shafer-Landau, 293) I like this view because I believe that people should be able to live their lives according to their own moral standards. Cultural groups and societies should be able to dictate what is good and what is bad on their own. A moral code should not have to be validated by a god, people can be the authors of morality. The views of Cultural Relativism are very similar to sovereignty. Living in a world filled with many cultures it would be impossible to create one uniform moral code that could be accepted by everyone. For this reason alone, cultural relativists believe that the morality of an act can only be determined when viewed through the context of the society that the action was made in and every societies’ moral code should be viewed as equal to one another.

Related Documents

Related Topics