The Euthyphro Dilemma: Religion and Morality (Divine Command Theory)
Summary
TLDRThis 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
- ๐ 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.
- ๐ Divine Command Theory posits that an act is morally good if God commands it and morally bad if God forbids it.
- ๐ค 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.
- ๐ถ 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.
- ๐ง Intelligent theists and atheists recognize the Euthyphro dilemma as a deep philosophical problem that challenges the basis of divine command theory.
- ๐ผ๏ธ The script uses three pictures to visually represent the dilemma's options and the implications of each.
- ๐ 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.
- ๐ 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.
- ๐ 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.
- ๐ 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.
- ๐ญ 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
๐ 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.
๐ The Euthyphro Dilemma: Exploring the Two Options
The second paragraph delves into the Euthyphro Dilemma, examining the implications of the second optionโthat 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.
๐ค 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.
๐ง 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.
Mindmap
Keywords
๐กDivine Command Theory
๐กEuthyphro Dilemma
๐กMorality
๐กAristotelian
๐กArbitrary
๐กOmnipotent
๐กEpistemological Source
๐กMetaphysical Source
๐กGoodness
๐กCultural Relativism
๐กEmpathy
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
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)