Divine Command Theory

Divine Command Theory

• Divine Command Theory (DCT) posits that goodness is solely determined by God's will.
• Plato's Euthyphro question explores whether God commands what is good because it is good, or if it is good because God commands it.
• DCT has a strong and a weak version.
• The strong version says morality is based only on God's will.
• The weak version allows for independent moral standards, but defers to God's will in conflicts.

DCT Strong Version

• Morality originates with God.
• Saying "morally right" means "willed by God."
• Since morality stems from divine will, there are no independent reasons for action.
• Dostoevsky notes "If there is no God, everything is permissible".

DCT Weak Version

• Omits or qualifies either of the 3 theses of strong DCT.
• Søren Kierkegaard's theory of the teleological suspension of the ethical represents this view.
  • Morality has an independent foundation of reason which still stands even if there is no God.
  • God's commands override reason if one has religious beliefs and a conflict occurs.
• Illustrated by the biblical story where Abraham was asked by God to sacrifice Isaac.
• Kierkegaard elaborates on the 3 stages of life: aesthetic, ethical, and religious.

Criticisms of the DCT

• There are challenges in determining what God wills.
• Sacred texts are general, and interpretations vary among religious leaders.
• Arbitrariness becomes a consideration if God can will anything and it would be good.
• Contradicts DCT since qualities like goodness and justice would hold a value independent of God if He has to only will what is good.
• Theory undermines autonomy as rational beings in that we are just conforming to God.
• What religion teaches as Gods will may be put into question.

Importance of the concept of God in Morality

• It ensures that ultimate justice exists.
• God guarantees that the just are rewarded and the unjust punished.
• God's existence provides hope that the good will prevail.
• Religion provides a strong motivation to be moral.
• The existence of a just God and an immortal soul motivate to be moral, as does the fear of eternal domination, and yearning for eternal life.
• Religion provides practices and community to support values.

Natural Law Theory

• Morality is part of the natural order.
• Reason discovers valid moral principles by assessing the nature of humanity and society.
• What is unnatural is also immoral.

Natural Law and God

• Older versions point to God as the source of natural law.
• Modern theories claim that natural law is inherent in the universe and humanity, thus it needs no supernatural force.

Major Proponents: The Stoics

• (1st Century BC): They conceived of natural law and believed that God is immanent or identical with nature/pantheism.
• Nature, for the Stoics, refers to the natural order as a whole-"cosmic nature."
• To live a good life, humans align with this.
• Fundamental cosmic principles govern everything.
• Natural order is thus rational.
• To reason and act rationally is to be in harmony with nature.
• Rationality is key in pursuing a moral life.
• Irrationality and disharmony with universal laws result in violence and vice.

Major Proponents: Thomas Aquinas

• (1224-1274): He synthesized the Stoics theory of cosmic natural law with Aristotle's view that human beings have a specific nature, purpose, and function.
• Humanity functions to exhibit rationality.
• Fundamental precept of the natural law: good is to be done and evil avoided.
• All things to which man has a natural inclination are naturally apprehended by reason as good, and those which are evil are avoided.
• Acting in concordance with natural inclinations is good, fundamental of which include our desires for life and procreation, knowledge, and sociability.

Challenges to Natural Law Theory

• Natural Law Theory follows moral absolutism.
• Moral absolutism claims that certain action are always obligatory.
• Principle of Forfeiture states that a person who threatens the life of an innocent person forfeits his/her own right to life.
• Principle of Double Effect states that it is always wrong to do a bad act intentionally in order to bring about good consequences, but that it is sometimes permissible to do a good act despite knowing that it will bring about bad consequences.

Principle of Double Effect Elaborated

• When an act has a good and bad effect, the act is good if:
• In itself and apart from the consequences, the act is good. (The Nature-of-the-Act Condition)
• The bad effect must not be the means by which one achieves the good effect. (The Means-End Condition)
• Only the good effect is intended, it is only an unintended side effect. (The Right-Intention Condition)
• The good effect must be at least equivalent to the importance of the bad effect. (The Proportionality Condition)

How the principle of double effect works

• Case 1: A pregnant woman with a cancerous uterus undergoes hysterectomy to save her life which terminates pregnancy.
• Case 2: Nita's father planted a bomb that will detonate and she promised not to reveal the location, however authorities may need to torture her get the info to save thousands. Is it morally permissible to torture Nita?

Some Criticisms to Natural Law Theory

• In regards to the principle of double effect, how does one distinguish from unforeseen consequences?
• Hume's challenge: how can we derive an "ought" from an "is"? How can what is natural be obligatory?
• The assumption moral laws are written in nature is challenged by the Darwinian evolution theory, which claims that nature has no inherent design.

Imperatives

• Acting from duty is unconditional.
• Types include hypothetical and categorical.
• Hypothetical: "If you want X, then do Y."
• Categorical: "Do Y."
• Categorical imperatives come from laws governing actions, while hypothetical ones come from desires.
• Moral imperatives, as claimed my Kant, are categorical.
• The imperative to perform moral duties is derived from one's respect for moral laws, not from one's desires for the act's consequences.

Moral Principles

• Formulas/Formulations of the (Moral) Categorical Imperative are used to identify the morally good act.
• There are two main principles: universalizability and respect for persons.

Principle of Universalizability

• Morally good actions must be a maxim that can be made universal without contradiction.
• A maxim is a law created by a person for himself/herself: "I ought to do X.”
• Universalizing a maxim means making one's own law a law for everyone: "Everyone ought to do X."
• Universalizing a maxim without a contradiction means that the resulting law will not make the act that it is regulating meaningless.

Principle of Respect for Persons

• An action is morally good if it does not use persons merely as means but also as ends at the same time.
• Persons have interests and can't be treated as mere objects.
• Treating persons as means is treating them in ways that satisfy our own interests, while treating persons as ends is treating them in ways that satisfy their interests.
• People can be treated as means and as ends.
• Disregarding someones interest and thereby using them as mere means is morally wrong.
• Treat persons in ways they will give their informed and voluntary consent is an example of this principle in modern version.

Challenges to Kant's Theory

• Lacks openness to consider particular circumstances.
• Feelings and emotions are also important in doing morally good actions.
• The notion of moral persons is limited to those that are rational and able to exercise rationality.

Conditional Deontology and Rossian Ethics

• Moral duties are conditional and depend on the circumstances of the situation.

Rossian Ethics - Motivation and Approach

• W.D. Ross aims to avoid the negative features of Kantian Deontology and Utilitarianism:
• Kant's categorical imperatives do not admit of exceptions and can be impractical at times, so Ross aims to correct this.
• Utilitarianism may justify injustices and violations of moral rights.

Features of Rossian Ethical Approach

• Morality is deontological and deals with following moral duties.
• Duties come from many factors, like relationships.
• What moral duties prevail depends on the conditions of the situation.

Prima Facie and Actual Duties

• Initially, all duties appear as prima facie duties, as they are first recognized.
• List of the primary prima facie duties:
• Fidelity - fulfilling promises and agreements.
• Reparation - making up for wrongful acts.
• Gratitude - repaying other people's favors.
• Justice - distribution of benefits and burdens fairly.
• Beneficence - improving the conditions of others.
• Self-improvement - improving one's own conditions.
• Nonmaleficence - duty not to injure other people
• Duties may conflict (conflict situation).
• The prima facie duty that is not challenged by another becomes the actual one.
• In conflicting scenarios, the stronger duty is the actual duty
• Recognition of duties is intuitive.
• Maturity, capability for understanding, ability to account for moral convictions, and character are needed.