...Philosophical Essay Part 1 5. Socrates asks Euthyphro, “Are morally good acts willed by God because they are morally good, or are they morally good because they are willed by God?” (1) How does this question relate to the Divine Command Theory of morality? (2) What are the philosophical implications associated with each option here? Divine command theory is widely held to be refuted by an argument known as “the Euthyphro dilemma”. This argument is named after Plato’s Euthyphro dialogue, which contains the inspiration for the argument, though not, as is sometimes thought, the argument itself. The Euthyphro dilemma rests on a modernised version of the question asked by Socrates in the Euthyphro: “Are morally good acts willed by God because they are morally good, or are they morally good because they are willed by God?” Each of these two possibilities, the argument runs, leads to consequences that the divine command theorist cannot accept. Whichever way the divine command theorist answers this question, then, it seems that his theory will be refuted. This argument might be formalised as follows: The Euthyphro Dilemma (1) If divine command theory is true then either (i) morally good acts are willed by God because they are morally good, or (ii) morally good acts are morally good because they are willed by God. (2) If (i) morally good acts are willed by God because they are morally good, then they are morally good independent of God’s will. (3) It is not the case that...
Words: 1239 - Pages: 5
...1b) to what extent are things only good because God commands them? (10) To find out the extent to which things are only good because of God commanding them you would first have to decide whether an action or thing becomes good because of God commanding it or if it is good before. Other questions which should be examined include whether the things God has commanded you to do are actually ‘good’ and if the things God has said are wrong and immoral really are. Personally I believe that many things can be good even if God has not declared it to be so and this point has become increasingly obvious throughout time; one of the most renowned and obviously ridiculous examples of things that God has informed us is not ‘good’ is homosexuality. In my opinion this is the best example of why the answer to our question is a ‘very small extent’; God, Christianity and many other religions are absolutely against homosexuality with no exceptions at all taking a strictly deontological view on the matter. Despite the act you would think, not hurting anyone Leviticus 18:22 clearly states that this is an abomination and those who practice homosexuality should be put to death, yet the entire religion of Christianity is based upon love, love of oneself, love of your neighbour, and most importantly love of God. But why should the love of another man be considered evil? God has clearly commanded that humans should not be gay and that the act is wrong, evil, and most poignantly not ‘good’ but then sets...
Words: 901 - Pages: 4
... You will write a 1500 word argumentative essay on the topic of Ethics and Religion or Value Theory. Only your own writing counts towards the 1500 word min. Quotes should be used sparingly, and will not be factored into your word-count. You will submit a copy to Turnitin (via Blackboard) as well as a hard copy to me in class or in my mailbox. Assignments turned in after the start of class on Tuesday September 8 will have 5% deducted, and will not be accepted after the start of class Thursday September 10 (hard copy and Turnitin by the beginning of class). Please choose from the following topics: 1. What is the Divine Command Theory? How does Plato’s argument in the Euthyphro cast doubt on this theory? Can Divine Command Theory overcome Plato’s (and others’) criticisms? Why or why not? (Your answer to the third question will be your thesis statement/conclusion, which you will support throughout your paper.) 2. What objections does Robert Nozick raise to the theory that happiness is the only thing desirable for its own sake? Nozick claims that “Plugging into the machine is a kind of suicide.” What does he mean be this? Do you think he is right? (Your answer to the last question will be your thesis statement/conclusion, which you will support throughout your paper.) 3. How does J.J.C. Smart argue for Extreme Utilitarianism? Do you agree that we ought to follow Extreme Utilitarianism? Why or why not? What are the potential problems...
Words: 655 - Pages: 3
...An Expansion of Euthypho’s Dilemma A dilemma is defined as a situation in which a difficult choice has to be made between two or more alternatives, especially equally undesirable ones. One philosophical dilemma that has remained culturally significant is the Euthyphro dilemma. The dilemma was first proposed in Plato's dialogue Euthyphro, in which 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?" Translated, this question asks "Is what is morally good commanded by God because it is morally good, or is it morally good because it is commanded by God?" In this essay I will explain and elaborate on the consequences of both options of the dilemma. The first choice of the dilemma (that which is morally good is commanded by God because it is morally good) suggests that there are independent moral standards, which God himself cannot alter. While this perspective gives purpose to the concept of morality, it challenges the properties and abilities of an omnipotent god such as the Christian god defined by the Bible. For instance, if moral standards exist that are independent from God, then there is something God himself cannot control. Instead of God controlling the known universe, God is instead controlled by these moral standards. In addition, God’s righteousness depends upon how closely he follows these moral standards. Therefore, God is restricted in his power and denied his free will if he is to be righteous...
Words: 513 - Pages: 3
...or are they morally good because they are willed by God? This question was first raised by Socrates to Euthyphro in Plato’s dialogue in 380 B.C. In this essay, I will explain how this question relates to the Divine Command Theory of Morality and attempt to explain how it poses a dilemma within philosophy by contradicting how the logical thinking process works by creating a false dichotomy. To begin, The Divine Command Theory has been a main stay in philosophy since ancient times and has created numerous arguments throughout the ages, some of which are heavily debated till this day. The Divine Command Theory states that actions are considered morally good because they are commanded by God, or more simply phrased by Dale Tuggy in his writing, “to be right is to be commanded by God, and to be wrong is to be forbidden by God” (Tuggy, 53). Since God created the heavens and Earth, according to various religions past and present, God must have created the good will and moral acts. This seems legitimate in all aspects of thinking, especially for the believers in God, but what about the people around the world that do not believe in God or a God? Are they subject to the same way of thinking that the religious people are? After all, the Divine Command Theory is clear and concise about what constitutes a good, moral act and where it came from. Tuggy goes on to simplify this dilemma by phrasing the question in more lamen terms. He writes that an act is right or wrong only if there is...
Words: 1265 - Pages: 6
...THE MORAL ARGUMENT KANT’S MORAL ARGUMENT - Immanuel Kant analysed Aquinas’ 4th way and devised his proof for God based on morality INNATE MORAL AWARENESS - Kant’s starting point was that we all have a sense of innate moral awareness: ‘Two things fill the mind with ever new increasing admiration and awe… the starry heavens above me and the moral law within me’ His argument for the existence of God follows: 1. We all have a sense of innate moral awareness – from this we are under obligation to be virtuous 2. An ‘average’ level of virtue is not enough, we are obliged to aim for the highest standard possible 3. True virtue should be rewarded with happiness 4. There is an ideal state where human virtue and happiness are united – this Kant called the ‘Summum Bonum’ 5. Moral statements are prescriptive – ‘ought’ implies ‘can’ 6. Humans can achieve virtue in a lifetime but it is beyond us to ensure we are rewarded with happiness 7. Therefore there must be a God who has power to ensure that virtue and happiness coincide Kant’s moral argument does not postulate that God is necessary for morality but that God is required for morality to achieve its end ‘Therefore it is morally necessary to assume the existence of God.’ CARDINAL NEWMAN “We feel responsibility, are ashamed, are frightened at transgressing the voice of conscience, this implies that there is one to whom we are responsible.” For Newman, the existence of conscience implies a moral law-giver whom we are answerable...
Words: 803 - Pages: 4
...| Philosophy 101-01 | 9/21/2012 | | The definition of division causes a basis of argument in Plato’s “Euthyphro”. While awaiting trial, Euthyphro explains that he has brought his father in front of the Judge with a murder charge. The idea of bring one’s own father to court brings forth room for debate between Socrates and Euthyphro. The main question being what is the definition of piety? The main reason that Socrates asks this question is so that he can use the answer to defend himself, but while searching for the definition they find much controversy in Euthyphro’s action of bringing his father to court. It is clear that Socrates is looking for a universal definition of piety, in which all actions can be measure to determine whether or not they are pious. In order for the definition to be universal it must express what is essential about the thing being defined. The word piety was defined several ways throughout the reading. At first Euthyphro explains that “piety is what he is doing now, that is prosecuting his father for manslaughter (Plato 5d ).” Socrates disagrees stating that it was not a definition but simply an example of piety and therefore does not provide a fundamental characteristic which makes a pious thing pious. Euthyphro then continues to explain in his second definition that “piety is what is pleasing to the gods (Plato 6e-7a).” Socrates consents to this definition because it is expressed in a general form, but then criticizes it on the...
Words: 1384 - Pages: 6
...It’s like an extinct that instantly kicks in when there is something you just don’t understand and you just try to make sense of it. So you over analyze the situation forgetting that no two people think alike. Well maybe two individuals happen to think of the same thing at the same exact time but it’s just a coincidence. We forget that morals vary from the wide variety of cultures, people, and practically the universe. Morality is merely just good vs. Bad. It is one of the many theories that fall under the Divine command theory. The divine command theory states “things are morally good or bad, or morally obligatory, permissible, or prohibited, solely because God’s will or commands”. (Philosophy of religion)Plato’s Euthyphro came up with an argument known as the Euthyphro dilemma. A series of questions of morally good act to defend the divine command theory. Morality is the set of common rules, habits and customs, that have won social approval over time, so that they seem part of the nature of things, as facts; outcomes of our social history. Obtaining happiness is one of the many qualities we crave to achieve. Anything is possible. That’s what we all assume. Personal opinions about what we believe is true and what we hope is true. All in what could be classified as moral objectivism which states “the truth value of a given moral proposition is determined by objective facts about reality and this truth is independent of subjective opinion regarding that proposition”. (Biddle)...
Words: 712 - Pages: 3
...Plato's famous question concerning the nature of goodness asks whether a thing is good because God says it is good, or does God say it's good because it is good. This is known as Euthyphro Dilemma (Rachels 51). The dilemma makes clear the way in which we as humans are confused and circular about our uses of the concept of authority, trying to pin one type of authority onto another, until we have gone full circle without ever having to explain it. It shows that religion and morality are both as human as ever, for it is the humans that are trying to work out where authority is, whether it is in the divine, or elsewhere, and our judgments are always going to be limited and human, and ultimately depend upon humanity for the source of authority of our judgments. The two sides of the dilemma: First, we might mean that right conduct is right because God commands it (Rachels 51). This means being that God demands good deeds from us because it is right. Basically that there are already Moral standards established in society and god simply demands them to be fulfilled. Second, God commands are not arbitrary; they are the result of his wisdom in knowing what is best (Rachels 52). This means being that the deeds God demands are only good because God commands them. Basically it is the theory that there would be no Moral standards if God did not demand them from us. The consequences of endorsing the first of Socrates option, we will be stuck with the most religious people would find unacceptable...
Words: 534 - Pages: 3
...Kant’s moral argument focuses on the notion that God must exist to provide structure to the moral universe. Technically he did not believe that is was possible to prove the existence of God through rational or empirical means. It is important to outline two key ideas before explaining the details of the moral argument. These ideas centre around his assumptions of the universe: that the universe was fair; and that the world around us is fundamentally rational. He begins with the unspoken assumption that the world is fair, owing to the dominance of the enlightenment belief that the universe was fundamentally knowable through reason. It is important to note that Kant began a new way of looking at knowledge. He believed that we could know the world through reason in a prior synthetic way. This was a complete change from how the world had been view previously and was known as Kant’s Copernican revolution. In essence Kant believed in two separate worlds of knowledge: noumenal and the phenomenal worlds. The noumenal world is the world as it truly is without being observed. It is fundamentally unknowable because the act of observation changes the very thing that we observe. It is as though human beings have a specific set of spectacles that cannot be taken off and like the proverbial rose tinted ones they change our perception of the world around us. This personalised view of the universe is the phenomenal world. However, what is key to explaining Kant’s moral argument is the fact that...
Words: 2616 - Pages: 11
...AS Philosophy & Ethics Course Handbook 2013 to 2014 [pic] OCR AS Level Religious Studies (H172) http://www.ocr.org.uk/qualifications/type/gce/hss/rs/index.aspx OCR AS Level Religious Studies (H172) You are studying Philosophy of Religion and Religious Ethics and will be awarded an OCR AS Level in Religious Studies. The modules and their weightings are: |AS: |Unit Code |Unit Title |% of AS |(% of A Level) | | |G571 |AS Philosophy of Religion |50% |(25%) | | |G572 |AS Religious Ethics |50% |(25%) | If you decide to study for the full A Level you will have to study the following modules at A2: |A2: |Unit Code |Unit Title |(% of A Level) | | |G581 |A2 Philosophy of Religion |(25%) | | |G582 |A2 Religious Ethics |(25%) | Grading | ...
Words: 13036 - Pages: 53
...stability in the world (sun comes up every morning), it is constantly changing (you never step into the same river twice). 1. An old theory about this problem is that we gain all knowledge from our senses – empirically. 2. Plato disagreed with this. He said that because the world is constantly changing, our senses cannot be trusted. Plato illustrated his idea in the dialogue, ‘Meno’: Socrates sets a slave boy a mathematical problem. The slave boy knows the answer, yet he has not been taught maths. Plato suggests that the slave boy remembers the answer to the problem, which has been in his mind all along. So, according to Plato, we don't learn new things, we remember them. In other words, knowledge is innate. Plato’s Theory of the Forms Plato believed that the world was divided into: 1. Reality and; 2. Appearance |REALITY |APPEARANCE | |An intelligible world |A visible world | |A world beyond the senses |A world of senses | |A world of true knowledge |A world of opinions | [pic] [pic] [pic] [pic]...
Words: 17188 - Pages: 69
...Theology Revision Plato Plato lived in Athens in the 5th and 4th Centuries BC He was the student of Socrates and teacher of Aristotle He was a dualist- believed in the body and the soul He believed the soul was more perfect than the body He believed that societies should be run by philosophers He believed the physical world is a pale imitation of the world of the forms The allegory of the cave The prisoners- normal people of society The prisoner who escapes- philosophers, people that thirst to know the real truth The people casting the shadows- the leaders of society- shaping the world without knowing the truth The shadows/statues- what people believe is reality, what they are told to believe, things people deem to be important The cave- a world without knowledge, the physical world/the body The fire- controlled, dim light- limited knowledge. An imitation of the form of the good The journey outside- a difficult journey, acquisition of knowledge The sun- illuminates the true world- form of the good The journey back into the cave- the desire to educate and inform others of the truth The world of the Forms Forms Plato uses the word ‘form’ to describe the true essence of material objects in the world This idea of the ‘form’ exists in a non physical (yet more real) realm that can only be understood by the mind. This is called the world of the forms Plato believed that the forms were interrelated and hierarchical The highest form The ultimate principle...
Words: 5746 - Pages: 23
...mTELECOURSE STUDY GUIDE FOR The Examined Life FOURTH EDITION author J. P. White Chair, Department of Philosophy Santa Barbara City College contributing author Manuel Velasquez Professor of Philosophy Santa Clara University This Telecourse Study Guide for The Examined Life is part of a collegelevel introduction to philosophy telecourse developed in conjunction with the video series The Examined Life, and the text Philosophy: A Text with Readings, tenth edition, by Manuel Velasquez, The Charles Dirksen Professor, Santa Clara University. The television series The Examined Life was designed and produced by INTELECOM Intelligent Telecommunications, Netherlands Educational Broadcasting Corporation (TELEAC/NOT), and Swedish Educational Broadcasting Company (UR) Copyright © 2007, 2005, 2002, 1999 by INTELECOM Intelligent Telecommunications All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without the written permission of INTELECOM Intelligent Telecommunications, 150 E. Colorado Blvd., Suite 300, Pasadena, California 91105-1937. ISBN: 0-495-10302-0 Contents Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v Lesson One — What is Philosophy? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....
Words: 78103 - Pages: 313
...Metaethics Metaethics is a branch of analytic philosophy that explores the status, foundations, and scope of moral values, properties, and words. Whereas the fields of applied ethics and normative theoryfocus on what is moral, metaethics focuses on what morality itself is. Just as two people may disagree about the ethics of, for example, physician-assisted suicide, while nonetheless agreeing at the more abstract level of a general normative theory such as Utilitarianism, so too may people who disagree at the level of a general normative theory nonetheless agree about the fundamental existence and status of morality itself, or vice versa. In this way, metaethics may be thought of as a highly abstract way of thinking philosophically about morality. For this reason, metaethics is also occasionally referred to as “second-order” moral theorizing, to distinguish it from the “first-order” level of normative theory. Metaethical positions may be divided according to how they respond to questions such as the following: * Ÿ What exactly are people doing when they use moral words such as “good” and “right”? * Ÿ What precisely is a moral value in the first place, and are such values similar to other familiar sorts of entities, such as objects and properties? * Ÿ Where do moral values come from—what is their source and foundation? * Ÿ Are some things morally right or wrong for all people at all times, or does morality instead vary from person to person, context to context...
Words: 21310 - Pages: 86
