Madelyn West

Professor Burleson

Philosophy 2306

3 April 2021

Morality from the Divine

            The Divine Command Theory was created by a multitude of philosophers. This theory was set up to shine light on the pathway for humans to follow in efforts to be a perfect individual. The theory of the divine emphasizes that the existence of a moral compass can only exist through God or one holy being. The ten commandments specifically were put into place as moral boundaries for religious people to follow as Gods set rules and moral compass. In my own lifetime there has only ever been, and will be, one holy God who has given us divine commands to follow in order to strive to be what is essentially a “perfect” moral being. Many religions all over the world hold their God to the highest degree and follow rules blindly with faith. Now even if in disagreement with certain religions there still can be visual benefits to some degree of how this theory keeps those people inside of said moral boundaries.

            The Divine Command Theory has been argued over for thousands of years because it is said to revolve around the central idea of a higher being of God(s) who control what is moral. This higher being or multiple beings are, by technicality, an imaginative version of different individualistic faith that have either been passed down through a culture or enhanced through societal beliefs. The major idea behind this theory is that in polytheistic or monotheistic religions there are commands given from a divine being that encapsulate what is moral and what is immoral. The structural understanding is that if God does not ordain such actions then people will be prohibited from it by means of following the rules specified in their religion.

            There have been accounts of accusations in regard to whether religion as a practice has initiated morality or not. Some individuals have come forward to instigate this conversation by directing it at the fact that morality is innately given to each person even despite if they chose not to reflect on the rules given by any religion. This goes against what the Divine Command Theory states by purposing God does not define morality it is what the people inherently know deep in themselves to be right. This causes a greater discussion because if people do not require religion to understand morality then religion would have inevitably dissolved throughout the years. Since religion has not only remained steadfast but grown stronger all over the world it begs the question of what the reality of necessity is in the first place for relying on a higher being to decide morality.

            In the year 399 BCE there was a dialogue written by the philosopher Plato about Socrates having a conversation geared toward this exact topic of morality in religion. The dialogue was titled Euthyphro, and this is the name of the other philosopher that Socrates was having this debate with. In this text they are outside of a courthouse.  Socrates is awaiting his own trial to be held and Euthyphro is bringing murder charges up against his own father. The two men begin a debate over how to know what true piety is as well as impiety. They start to “debate five different definitions of piety, none of which Socrates finds adequate” because there is a problem with each one (Fieser, 2019). “Socrates and Euthyphro agree that what they seek is a single form, present in all things that are pious” and yet Euthyphro could still not give the exact reasoning for this description falling short of what they were both trying to understand (Britannica, 2020) Shortly after this debate Plato develops the idea of what he called Euthyphro’s Dilemma which was to challenge the nature of piety and it questions, “is an act right because God says it’s so, or does God say it’s so because it’s right?” (Koukl, 2012). This dilemma brings up the two most important views of the Divine Command Theory and challenges it to the fullest. This is because if there is difference between a good and bad action on earth then if God is all omnipotent, He would see no difference in the two. All actions according to God would bear the same weight of negative or positive reaction because as religious people believe, every declaration that God makes to be “good” is true. Now where morality comes in there would be a question of whether someone would follow their faith completely even if it meant to put their own father on trial for accidental murder just because God had said to do so. This is what happened with Euthyphro in the first place on the account when he had the conversation with Socrates at the courthouse. This leads into another questionable point that is if every account of human morality is less than an almighty God then what would religious followers decide if He ordered everyone to kill each other. Assuming this order would be whispered into the ears of devote faithful followers then they should not question what God has commanded and do so without a second thought. This scenario is an example of how the Divine Command theory would in fact go against our societal borders of morality and this makes the theory very debatable in fact. The Divine Command Theory would be less questionable if it was a bit more lenient with the fact that most religions started a very long time ago and all Godly commandments during those periods of times are not completely followed in modern day time. Although every religion tends to hold its followers up to a greater standard of morality when from a young age rather than an individual who has had no religious upbringing.

            With the career that I have chosen to engulf myself in I think it is quite bias for me to say that, even despite the negative aspects of this theory, there is one true God and his commands are true. But since I am a part of a volunteer group at my church, I feel certain lively obligation to support my faith because it has been a lifeline of support for me since I was a young girl. Now basing my own belief system on whether or not I think it is right to follow each and every standard God command just because He does is where I separate myself from the Divine Command Theory. I believe that a positive moral standard can be put into us by God, but the Old Testament of the Bible tends to be full of recommendation boundaries that in my religion we do not abide by them to the fullest. This is where I have seen the split between religion as a practice and that it is meant to be an individualistic act and never something that should push someone’s own moral compass to the negative end of the spectrum. This is because I believe that my God specifically is omnipotent and would accept the fact that I don’t follow the culture structure that was during B.C. time period. In my career as a volunteer we are taught and teaching others morality everyday by ways of our religion because just like Euthyphro’s dilemma there is no real way to tell if morality is already within us from the beginning from God or from ourselves. This is where I believe faith in general comes into play because there are people who I come across daily who question me why I would choose to allow a God to dictate my every move in life. I simply answer that I believe the Bible was put into my path to lead my morality to become extensively more purposeful. Although I do trust God to help me dictate what is moral there are still things in the Bible that I have mixed emotions about, and I chose to just spend time in prayer about them. My faith gets tested just as my morality does and I think that intuition alone is given by God which means everyone should trust their intuition and allow their morality to guide them in their walk with religion.

           Now after truly coming to a better understanding of what this Divine Command Theory is put in place to hold true, it is easier to see how the debate of whether it is true will go on until the end of time. This fact is because without a tangible God or multiple Gods philosophers will continue to falsify faith and such beliefs in a higher being just out of the misunderstanding to why people shouldn’t just trust in their own morality alone. It is important to see where humanity has come from and the difference in morals over time. There once was a period where people were what we would call savages, and this represented an entirely different set of morality at the time. That time was living without the multitude of religions that are thriving today and it is will always be up for debate whether religion instigated morality or if humanity just all of the sudden came to know morality.

            Looking into my own future and envisioning growing older and having children does make me a bit worrisome as to whether or not the debate over the Divine Command Theory essentially being false will completely eradicate religions over time or not. Already with being surrounded by younger children in my workplace it is evident that their public-school systems are failing to allow the essence of a God to even exist. In the future I think this fact will just continue and not much is subject to change in a positive direction for religion. Although there are still currently private religious schools, I think there should be more options to be taught religion in public school. The future of my profession will hopefully remain consistent as I hope to get a stable job involved in my church as a worship leader. Overall, I am blessed to be able to do what I love and be surrounded by individuals who share the same belief system as I do. The Divine Command Theory I would say has some flaws in the degree to which religious believers should follow their God(s) but aside from that I stand by my own faith and religion until the end.

​

Works Cited

Fieser, James. “Socrates From Ancient and Medieval Philosophy .” Socrates , The University of Tennessee at Martin, 1 Jan. 2019,

www.utm.edu/staff/jfieser/class/314/02-314-socrates.htm.

“Euthyphro Early Dialogues.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., 2020, www.britannica.com/biography/Plato/Early-

dialogues#ref407288.

Koukl, Greg. “Euthyphro's Dilemma .” Euthyphro's Dilemma, 7 Dec. 2012, www.str.org/w/euthyphro-s-dilemma-1.

​