Divine Command Theory and the Story of Abraham

This lecture focuses on the story of Abraham from Genesis 22 to exemplify issues with Divine Command Theory, particularly when relying on specific religious texts. This is not meant as a criticism of Christianity specifically, but to highlight problems identified by Gersom, Holmgren, and Chao.

The Story of Abraham

God commands Abraham to offer his son Isaac as a burnt offering (Genesis 22:2).
Isaac is presented as innocent; there's no indication he has done anything wrong.
This scenario highlights the problem of arbitrary moral rules, as emphasized in the moral ground version of Divine Command Theory.
Killing is generally impermissible but seemingly permissible when commanded by God for a burnt offering.
There is no stated reason or justification for why this sacrifice is required other than "God said so."
This suggests morality depends on God's whims rather than reasoned principles, contrasting with Plato's approach to justice.
The command is an example of a seemingly immoral action that lacks sufficient justification, raising questions about why Abraham should follow it.

Abraham's Reaction and Moral Responsibility

Abraham unquestioningly prepares to carry out the command immediately.
This raises concerns about the reliability of the text and potential misinterpretations in Genesis.
A crucial element seems to be missing: Abraham questioning why God wants him to kill his son.
Gersom and Holmgren view this unquestioning obedience as a betrayal of moral responsibility, portraying individuals as mere robots.
Abraham's actions demonstrate a lack of independent moral agency, simply following the divine command.

Deception and Denial of Autonomy

Abraham deceives Isaac when his son asks about the lamb for the offering (Genesis 22:8).
Abraham responds: "God will provide the lamb."
Abraham already knows that God intends for Isaac to be the offering.
Problem: Abraham is denying Isaac's autonomy by not informing him of the situation.
Abraham binds Isaac and prepares to kill him - a consequence of a divine command received without question.

The Angel's Intervention and Loyalty Test

An angel intervenes, not God directly, stopping the sacrifice (Genesis 22:11-12).
The angel states that Abraham's willingness to sacrifice Isaac proves his fear of (or loyalty to) God.
The entire episode is framed as a test of loyalty, which Abraham passes.
Abraham is rewarded with numerous offspring and blessings for his willingness to commit what would otherwise be a shockingly immoral act.
The act stems from blind loyalty or fear, both of which are questionable motivations for moral actions.
Such actions, in any other context, would be considered immoral and could be justifiably criticized.

Implications for Metaethics

The inclusion of this story by Gersom and Holmgren highlights the problems of grounding moral rules solely in divine commands.
More importantly, it raises skepticism about the knowability of morality and the role of reason in ethical decision-making.
If morality is simply based on divine commands, then the answer to "Why is this action immoral?" becomes simply "Because God said so."
This undermines our capacity to use reason to investigate and justify moral principles.
The moral ground version seems implausible, and we lack privileged access to God's moral reasoning.

Conclusion

The story of Abraham serves as a critical examination of Divine Command Theory, revealing potential issues related to arbitrary moral rules, unquestioning obedience, and the role of reason in determining ethical behavior. It leads to skepticism about the basis of morality and the role of reason in moral decision-making.

Next video: Ethical Egoism