The Euthyphro Dilemma: Religion and Morality (Divine Command Theory)

Summary

This script explores the Euthyphro dilemma, challenging the divine command theory of morality. It presents two horns: morality is either arbitrary, with God's commands determining goodness, or God is not the source of morality and is subject to an external moral law. The third option, that God is goodness itself, is also critiqued as collapsing into the first two. The discussion prompts a deeper examination of the relationship between morality and religion, questioning whether morality can be based solely on God's commands.

Takeaways

• 📜 The Euthyphro dilemma explores the relationship between ethics and religion, specifically whether morality is derived from God's commands or if God's commands are moral because they align with an independent standard of goodness.
• 🙏 Divine Command Theory posits that an act is morally good if God commands it and morally bad if God forbids it.
• 🤔 The Euthyphro dilemma presents two horns: if God wills something because it's good, it implies a moral standard outside of God; if something is good because God wills it, morality becomes arbitrary.
• 👶 The dilemma illustrates the problem with divine command theory by asking whether actions like drowning children for fun could become morally good if God commanded them.
• 🧐 Intelligent theists and atheists recognize the Euthyphro dilemma as a deep philosophical problem that challenges the basis of divine command theory.
• 🖼️ The script uses three pictures to visually represent the dilemma's options and the implications of each.
• 🔄 The first option (God wills it because it's good) is problematic because it suggests there's a standard of goodness independent of God, making God a 'middleman' rather than the source of morality.
• 🔄 The second option (it's good because God wills it) is criticized for making morality arbitrary and dependent solely on God's will, which could change at any time.
• 🔄 The third option (God is goodness) is considered but collapses into the first two options when considering whether God's essence was chosen or inherent.
• 📚 The Euthyphro dilemma is not an argument against God's existence but a challenge to the idea that morality can be based solely on God's commands.
• 💭 The script encourages deep reflection on the dilemma and suggests that even divine command theorists often rely on reasons for morality that are independent of God's commands.

Q & A

What is Divine Command Theory?

Divine Command Theory is the belief that things are good because God commands them, and things are bad because God forbids them. In this view, morality is determined by God's will.

What is the Euthyphro Dilemma as presented in the script?

The Euthyphro Dilemma asks whether something is good because God wills it, or if God wills it because it is good. This presents a challenge to Divine Command Theory by questioning whether morality is arbitrary or if there is a standard of goodness independent of God.

What is the first problem with the view that morality is based solely on God's commands?

The first problem is that it makes morality arbitrary. If morality is determined solely by God's will, then God could command anything, even morally heinous acts like killing children, and it would be considered good.

How does Divine Command Theory lead to moral arbitrariness?

If morality is based solely on what God commands, then any act, no matter how cruel or unjust, could be deemed good if God wills it. This makes morality subject to change and potentially arbitrary.

What is the second option of the Euthyphro Dilemma?

The second option is that God commands something because it is good. However, this implies that goodness exists independently of God, which challenges the idea of God as the ultimate source of morality.

Why is the second option problematic for monotheists?

The second option suggests that there is an independent standard of goodness outside of God, which contradicts the belief that God is the omnipotent source of all goodness. It turns God into a 'middleman' rather than the creator of moral law.

What is the third option some propose to resolve the Euthyphro Dilemma?

Some propose that God is goodness itself, and morality flows from God's essence rather than being arbitrary or based on an independent standard. This view attempts to reconcile the dilemma by suggesting that God's essence is inherently good.

How does the third option still face issues related to the Euthyphro Dilemma?

The third option faces the issue of whether God chose His essence. If God chose His essence, then He could have chosen an essence that allows for morally wrong acts. If God did not choose His essence, then there is something independent of God that determines His essence, which brings back the original dilemma.

What is the challenge to Divine Command Theory presented by examples like Abraham and modern-day religious extremists?

The challenge is that if morality is solely based on God's commands, there is no way to know whether God might command morally heinous acts, as in the story of Abraham being commanded to sacrifice his son. This raises concerns about the reliability of basing morality on divine commands alone.

What does the script suggest is the relationship between reason, empathy, and morality in opposition to Divine Command Theory?

The script suggests that even intelligent theists believe God gave humans reason and empathy to discover what is morally right and wrong. Morality should be based on these factors to promote human flourishing, rather than being solely reliant on God's commands.

Outlines

00:00

📜 Introduction to Divine Command Theory and the Euthyphro Dilemma

This paragraph introduces the concept of Divine Command Theory, which posits that something is good because God commands it, and bad because God forbids it. It discusses the Euthyphro Dilemma, a philosophical problem that arises from this theory. The dilemma is presented as a choice between two options: either God commands something because it is good, or something is good because God commands it. The paragraph emphasizes the depth of the problem, suggesting that even if everyone agreed on God's existence and commands, the dilemma would persist. It also introduces the Socratic dialogue 'Euthyphro' as a key text for exploring this issue.

05:01

🔍 The Euthyphro Dilemma: Exploring the Two Options

The second paragraph delves into the Euthyphro Dilemma, examining the implications of the second option—that something is good because God wills it. It points out that this view can make morality arbitrary, as God's commands could change and thus alter what is considered morally good or bad. The paragraph uses illustrations to help understand the dilemma and suggests that even if God's will were known, the theory would still face problems. It also touches on the idea that many people who claim to be divine command theorists actually base their morality on other principles, such as the inherent wrongness of killing innocent life.

10:03

🤔 The First Option of the Euthyphro Dilemma: God Commands Because It's Good

This paragraph explores the first option of the Euthyphro Dilemma, which suggests that God commands something because it is inherently good. It argues that this view implies a standard of goodness that exists independently of God, which contradicts the belief that God is the source of all goodness. The paragraph uses the analogy of good parenting to illustrate how God might be seen as a recognizer rather than a creator of goodness. It also introduces a third option, which is not fully developed but suggests that God is goodness itself, and that goodness naturally flows from God's essence.

15:03

🧐 The Complexity of the Third Option and Philosophical Implications

The fourth paragraph continues the discussion of the third option, suggesting that it may collapse into the first two options of the Euthyphro Dilemma. It raises the question of whether God's essence is chosen or inherent, which echoes the original dilemma. The paragraph also reflects on the philosophical implications of the Euthyphro Dilemma, suggesting that it challenges the idea that morality can be based solely on divine commands. It encourages further exploration of the relationship between morality and religion and provides questions for deeper understanding.

Keywords

💡Divine Command Theory

Divine Command Theory is a philosophical and ethical concept that suggests an action is morally right because a god commands it, and morally wrong if the god forbids it. This theory is central to the video's exploration of the relationship between ethics and religion. The video uses examples such as 'homosexuality, slavery, and genocide' to illustrate how this theory might be applied, arguing that these things are wrong because 'God forbids them.'

💡Euthyphro Dilemma

The Euthyphro Dilemma, derived from Plato's dialogue 'Euthyphro,' is a philosophical question that challenges the Divine Command Theory by asking whether a thing is good because God loves it, or does God love it because it is good. This dilemma is the crux of the video's argument, presenting a problem that even if everyone agreed on God's existence and commands, the question of morality's basis would remain.

💡Morality

Morality, in the context of the video, refers to a set of principles or rules that distinguish between right and wrong or good and bad behavior. The video explores whether morality is derived from divine commands or if it exists independently. It discusses how morality might be seen as arbitrary if it's solely based on God's commands.

💡Aristotelian

Aristotelian refers to the philosophical traditions and ideas stemming from the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle. While not explicitly mentioned, the video's discussion of 'flourishing in life' echoes Aristotelian concepts of eudaimonia, or human flourishing, which is a key component in Aristotle's ethical theory.

💡Arbitrary

Arbitrary, in the video, is used to describe a situation where something is decided or done capriciously or by chance, without a discernible pattern or reason. The video argues that if morality is based solely on divine command, then it becomes arbitrary because God could command anything to be good, and it would be so.

💡Omnipotent

Omnipotent refers to the concept of having unlimited power or being able to do anything. The video discusses the implications of God's omnipotence in relation to the Divine Command Theory, questioning whether God's nature (essence) is something He chose or something that chose Him.

💡Epistemological Source

Epistemological Source pertains to the origin of knowledge or understanding. The video suggests that while God or parents might be the source from which we learn about morality, they are not necessarily the source that makes actions morally right or wrong.

💡Metaphysical Source

Metaphysical Source refers to the fundamental nature or essence of something. The video contrasts the epistemological source with the metaphysical source, arguing that while we might learn about morality from God, the goodness or badness of actions has a metaphysical basis that is independent of God's commands.

💡Goodness

Goodness, in the video, is used to describe the quality of being good or morally right. It is discussed in the context of whether goodness is inherent to an act or if it is bestowed upon an act by God's command, which is central to the Euthyphro Dilemma.

💡Cultural Relativism

Cultural Relativism is the idea that moral or ethical principles are determined by one's own culture and are not universal. The video briefly touches on this by suggesting that if morality is based on what a culture wills, similar issues to Divine Command Theory would arise.

💡Empathy

Empathy is the ability to understand and share the feelings of others. The video mentions empathy as a human emotion that might guide moral decisions, independent of divine commands, suggesting that morality is not solely based on what God wills but also on human emotions and understanding.

Highlights

Exploring the relationship between ethics and religion.

Introduction to divine command theory.

The Euthyphro dilemma presented by Plato.

Socrates' question to Euthyphro about the nature of piety.

The dilemma of whether God wills something because it's good or if it's good because God wills it.

Critique of divine command theory making morality arbitrary.

The problem of knowing God's will and its implications for morality.

The argument that morality is not solely based on God's commands.

The suggestion that God commands something because it's good, not the other way around.

The issue of God being a 'middleman' in the first option of the dilemma.

The proposal of a third option where God is goodness itself.

The potential collapse of the third option into the first two horns of the dilemma.

The question of whether people discover the mind of God when they discover morality.

The Euthyphro dilemma as a challenge to divine command theory rather than an argument against God's existence.

The application of the Euthyphro dilemma in understanding the relationship between morality and religion.

The importance of the Euthyphro dilemma in philosophical discussions about morality and religion.

The suggestion that even divine command theorists often rely on God-independent reasons for morality.

Transcripts

so in this week's ethical readings

you're exploring the relationship

between ethics and religion so as you

explore the relationship between

religion and morality you'll find that

some people believe things are good

because God commands them and some

things are bad because god forbids them

this is called divine command theory so

for example if you argue that

homosexuality slavery and genocide are

wrong because god forbids them then

you're using divine command theory but

intelligent theists and atheists are

aware that there is a deep problem with

basing your morality and what God

commands and it's not simply that people

disagree about God's existence or what

God commands there's a deeper problem

that is even if everyone agreed that God

exists and agreed on what God commands

this problem would remain and this

problem is called the Euthyphro dilemma

a dilemma is when there's two choices

and neither of the two choices is good

so what is the Euthyphro dilemma

well Plato wrote a dialogue called the

Euthyphro and you'll be reading this

dialogue and answering questions about

it at the end of this lesson in the

dialogue Socrates is talking to a

religious man named Euthyphro now at one

point and this is the most important

point in the dialogue Socrates asked

Euthyphro whether the gods loved pious

acts because their pious or if it's

pious because it's loved by the gods

so the question can be phrased for the

modern monotheists in the following way

does God will it because it's good or is

it good because God wills it this is a

deep question and I recommend that you

think carefully about it before giving

an answer now Euthyphro could not

adequately answer this question and many

theists have struggled with it ever

since so let's look at the two options

of the dilemma and as we proceed I have

three lovely pictures I drew to help you

understand this dilemma so let's start

with the second option the second option

was it is good because God wills it and

it has a few problems now one obvious

problem again is knowing God's will

people disagree about what God's will

which is one reason why there's so many

religions but this is a superficial

problem there's a deeper problem that

exists even when we assume God exists

and we agree on what God wills and

commands now before getting into these

deeper problems notice again that the

second option is divine command theory

which is the position that

determines morality that is morally good

acts are those that God commands a

morally bad X are those that come from

bids right so again if you think

homosexuality is wrong simply because

god forbids it then your divine command

theorists right it doesn't matter if

homosexuality is natural or unnatural or

whether it promotes happiness all that

matters to the divine command theorists

in the end is that god forbids it or

allows it so let's examine this problem

with arguing that morality is nothing

but what God commands the problems with

the second horn dilemma now the first

problem with basing morality solely on

what God commands is that it seems to

make morality arbitrary okay since God

could command anything to be good and it

would suddenly be good for example let's

say divine command theory is correct and

it's round around kids for fun because

god forbids it

now if the morally good act is simply

what God commands then God could change

his mind tomorrow and command that I

drowned my kids in a bathtub and that

act would suddenly become good it

doesn't matter if I think killing

children is usually wrong because it

violates rights or doesn't promote

happiness or simply goes against the

empathy I have for kids all of these

reasons and Maury emotions are

irrelevant if I'm a divine command

theorists in this case so the first and

major problem with this second option

it's good because God commands it is it

makes morality arbitrary it makes

morality like an arbitrary matter of

taste it's good simply because God likes

it and God could like anything at any

time but again I just don't see how God

commanding and the drowning of kids for

fun would suddenly make it good I don't

see how things are good because God

commands or wills them now a divine

command theorist may object and say well

God would never command you to torture

kill or rape children for fun but this

response misses the point

if divine command theory is correct the

morality is simply based on what God

come in so how can anyone possibly know

God would not command these heinous acts

to know that the person would have to

appeal to something other than God's

command right and so they're not really

divine command theorists indeed there

was recently a lady in Houston who

believed God told her to drown her kids

in the bathtub also God told Abraham to

sacrifice his son so some of the

Crusaders and many terrorists believe

God commands them into many heinous acts

so how do you know God won't ask you to

kill your child tomorrow as he did

Abraham the bottom line is that

on command theory the second option the

dilemma makes morality arbitrary heinous

acts like drowning children for fun

would suddenly become obligatory if God

commanded them so at this point it

should also be clear that many people

are not really divine command theorists

and this is because they present

arguments like God wouldn't do that

because it's wrong to kill an innocent

life so their morality is really based

on the idea that it's wrong to kill an

innocent life not so much what somebody

claims to be God's will now there are

other problems with the SEC adoption you

know it makes morality mysterious it

gives the wrong reasons for being

immoral you know I'll address those in

the question suction for now I'll simply

say that not everyone understands the

problem here with the SEC adoption and

this was the problem that Socrates

outlined so long ago but Euthyphro

atheist and many intelligent theists do

understand the problem they understand

that the SEC adoption implies that

killing children for fun could be made

moral they understand that the main

problem with the SEC adoptions that it

makes morality arbitrary and so they

propose another option they propose and

enact as good not because God commands

it rather God commands it because it's

good and this avoids the arbitrary

problem because it avoids the

implication that killing children for

fun could become morally good tomorrow

now however the first option God

commands it because it's good has one

serious problem

it sets up a standard of goodness

separate from God so it makes God a

middleman this is a problem because most

monotheists believe God is the

omnipotent source of all goodness if God

merely recognizes good and then informs

us humans it follows that God is not an

omnipotent God is not the source of all

goodness but merely informs us about

some independent standard of good like a

middle man or a good parent and you can

see this illustrated in number one so

let's use an example imagine you have

good parents and they train needed to be

go to bed at a reasonable time to eat

healthy to follow the golden rule to be

empathetic towards others and to live a

good moral life at some point your

reason your intellect develops and you

understand that these things that are

not good because your parents commanded

them rather your parents taught you

these things because they're good

perhaps because they help you flourish

in life so you realize that your parents

and your culture are not the source of

goodness rather their goodness

recognizers there are goodness

transmitters they teach you what they

think will lead to a good life

just as a mother a corn you know may

teach a baby acorn to sunbathe and get

enough water right so if you think

something is good merely because your

parents are cultures say so then you

still have an immature or undeveloped

mindset your parents and culture are

good recognizers not good creators so if

the first option is correct then God is

like a good parent God is a good

recognizer not a good creator if the

first option is correct there is a God

independent standard of goodness you can

see the Sun in a diagram so John author

puts the point this way if God approves

kindness because it's a virtue and hates

the Nazis because they were evil then it

seems that God discovers morality rather

than inventing it God's no longer

sovereign over the entire universe but

rather is subject to moral law external

to himself so this turns God into

something like a good parent or middle

man who discovers principles that lead

to human flourishing and then transmits

them to us to use philosophical jargon

God and your parents may originally be

the epistemological source of your

morality that is how you come to know

good from bad but they're not the

metaphysical source they're not what

makes something that are bad so now we

have the two horns of the Euthyphro

dilemma morality is either arbitrary

meaning anything can be good or God is

not the source of morality and God is

subject to an external moral law so is

there a solution well some people have

presented a third option to the

Euthyphro dilemma and this is the idea

that God is goodness

God doesn't arbitrarily will what is

good rather goodness flows from God's

essence he is goodness you can see this

option than diagram under number three

now to clarify number three notice that

we may use reason to discover God's

essence which is truth and goodness for

example let's say Einsteins laws are

true when we rationally discover such

laws we are discovering the essence or

the mind of God likewise when we

discover that slavery is bad we are

discovering the moral essence of God and

this is not essential the third option

but it's a nice way to think of it in

short God doesn't arbitrarily we'll

goodness as in picture 1 and 2 whether

God is goodness so goodness flows

inevitably from God's essence

however this third option may fall into

the same dilemma to see why consider

this question

does God choose God's essence does God

choose God's essence now some people say

God is omnipotent and so he can choose

his essence if this is correct then God

could choose a different essence but

this presents the same dilemma that we

found in youth Rafael

did something else make God's essence or

did God choose his essence if God chose

his essence then he chose that to be

good and if that is the case he could

have chosen a different essence and in

essence that enjoys drowning kids for

example if God did not choose his

essence then God is not omnipotent and

subject to something else that made his

essence so again if God chose his

essence then he chose goodness option 2

the problem with this option is God

could have chosen any essence he could

have chosen to light killing kids for

fun if God did not choose as essence

option 1 then something independent of

God chose it in that case God's essence

and goodness are independent of God and

God becomes a good parent or middleman

instead of the source of all goodness so

in short the third option that I just

explored seems to collapse into one of

the first two options so there you have

it

this is the Euthyphro dilemma the first

two options

Socrates presented these first two

options he didn't address the third so

it's just as well since the third seems

to collapse into the first two options

now I agree with some other philosophers

that your ability to deeply understand

this dilemma is a reflection of whether

you are capable of certain kind of

philosophy whatever you think that

Euthyphro is the portal into a much

deeper exploration the relationship

between morality and religion in the end

it challenges the idea that morality can

base be based solely on God's commands

it's a challenge to divine command

theory to deepen your understanding

please review the following questions

and possible answers then follow the

link to the actual Euthyphro dilemma and

answer the guided questions and again

don't neglect those primary sources

right there's so much more there that I

haven't covered in this video so let's

look at the questions real quick

number one explain how the second option

divine command theory makes morality

arbitrary well killing kids for fun

becomes automatically good if it's good

or bad

simply because God wills it there's no

need to appeal to scientific facts to

empathy to greatest happiness to rights

the mere fact that God thinks in

commands it would be good would make it

so so that's the answer number one

number two discuss whether the sign

good option divine command theory

motivates a person to do the right thing

for the wrong reasons well it seems to

give the wrong reasons for being moral

so for example imagine a person chooses

to not torture kittens because he

believes it causes unnecessary suffering

now a second person chooses to not

torture kittens but only because of God

forbids it now isn't the first person a

more stable and moral okay look at

number three

explain why the second option divine

command theory makes morality mysterious

and this is from James Rachel's and it's

elements of moral philosophy it makes it

mysterious okay so the problem here is

the idea that an act is good because

what God wills it

it makes morality mysterious we can

understand how to make things but how do

you make things good when we argue about

moral matters like slavery most people

argue slavery is wrong because it

violates rights it doesn't promote the

greatest happiness or it doesn't follow

the Golden Rule

but if divine command theory is correct

none of that really matters all that

matters is that God commands or forbids

it so morality is no longer a matter of

determining how to protect rights or

promote happiness and now becomes a

matter of knowing God's will and it may

be completely mysterious as to why God

will some things but not others so like

some forms of relativism it just cuts

off reasoning on moral issues okay

number four explain why the first option

God wills it because it's good is

unsatisfactory to modern the monotheists

well it's unsatisfactory because it

presents an independent standard of

goodness to God it turns God into a good

parent or middlemen

instead of the source of all goodness

number five explain a three-picture is

representing the three options well you

can see that in the video number six

explain or discuss the third option okay

well it seems to me that the third

option the idea that God is goodness and

doesn't arbitrarily will good in bed

that this option faces the same problems

if we assume God is omnipotent could

have chosen a different nature or

essence for himself if God is not

omnipotent then he did not choose his

essence and so there's an independent

standard making God's essence and hence

is the true source of goodness so this

third option can become quite complex

and distinctions like God's essence and

existence need to be made epistemology

minutephysics

but in the end I just think it collapses

into

first two options number seven

can God be omnipotent if the third

option is true

well yeah but you know God's omnipotence

doesn't adequately resolve the Euthyphro

dilemma because the question then

becomes did God get his essence or did

God choose his essence that is is God's

essence good because it's good or is

God's essence good because God commanded

and created his essence number eight do

people discover the mind of God when

they discover what is right and wrong

well some people may think so but this

third option doesn't really resolve the

Euthyphro dilemma and you can see number

seven for y let's see here number nine

isn't this based on a misunderstanding

of omnipotence

well no I'm aware that omnipotence

doesn't mean God can do the logically

impossible like round a square or create

a married bachelor

however the Euthyphro dilemma doesn't

depend on omnipotence it simply depends

on whether an act is good because it's

good or because God wills it so to

illustrate we can substitute your

culture for God so do you believe it's

good because it's good or because your

culture wills it the same issues arise

without any claims to omnipotence okay

the next question is the Euthyphro

dilemma an argument against God's

existence well no the u-thor dilemma

doesn't prove or disprove God's

existence rather it presents a challenge

to anyone who bases morality and what

they think God commends now it is a

counter to one of the arguments for

God's existence the moral argument but

it itself doesn't say and God exists or

doesn't exist another interesting

question for the divine command theorist

is why is it wrong to disobey God you

know it might be because God knows

better than us but if that's the case

gods like a good parent not the source

of all morality

he's the epistemological source but not

the metaphysical source right maybe it's

because of power but then you would be

following the principle that might makes

right

surely God doesn't want you to follow

that principle right okay so let's look

at the application of value here so when

you explore the Euthyphro dilemma it can

help you better understand the

relationship at a deep level between if

you have them your moral and religious

beliefs

now all the most intelligent in popular

theists and atheists have struggled with

this

Descartes Luther and and some Hobbes and

so on and now it's your turn right

you're welcome

now in my experience people often give

simplistic answers at first for example

they may argue that both horns of the

dilemma dilemma are true but a little

reflection should help you see why both

options cannot be true second some will

try to avoid the dilemma by arguing

there's a third option you know God is

goodness and this is more sophisticated

and many fine distinctions can be made

between essence and existence

epistemology and metaphysics and so on

but in the end this third option brings

up the same dilemma you know why is

God's essence determined or was it

chosen and it's gonna collapse into

those first two options again in the end

the divine command theorist ultimately

resorts to arguments that make morality

a really mysterious matter instead of

one in which we try to maximize the

greatest happiness and protect a set of

Rights that we agree on and they're

essential for human flourishing now

there very well may be a God but

believing morality is nothing but God's

commands is problematic and even

intelligent theists agree with me here

intelligent theists believe that God

gave them reason and empathy discover

right and wrong to discover the

conditions that best promote human

flourishing so even you know it's

interesting that even the divine command

theorists aren't usually divine command

theorists because they often give God

independent reasons for why we should

obey God or act in moral ways all right

so that's my take on the Euthyphro

dilemma now you get to read the actual

dialogue I included some questions for

you here as you read enjoy Thanks

you