Divine Command Theory: Gearsome, Holmgren, and Moral Agency

Gearsome and Holmgren's Perspective on Divine Command Theory

  • Gearsome and Holmgren offer a perspective on Divine Command Theory (DCT) that, while consistent with Wallace Chao's, emphasizes different elements.

Differences in Emphasis

  • Gearsome and Holmgren do not explicitly distinguish between the moral ground and moral index versions of DCT, unlike Wallace Chao.

  • However, these interpretations are still evident in their premises.

Gearsome and Holmgren's Premises

  • Premise 1: God issues commands (through religious texts or revelation).

  • Premise 2: Actions commanded by God are morally required because they are commanded by God.

Ambiguity of "Because"

  • The word "because" introduces ambiguity:

    • Moral Ground Version: God's command causes the action to be morally right.

    • Moral Index Version: God has privileged access to moral information.

  • For Gearsome and Holmgren, the defining feature of DCT is that moral rules are determined by God's commands.

    • No further investigation into God's reasons is required; faith is sufficient.

Problems with Divine Command Theory

  • Gearsome and Holmgren raise two main problems with DCT:

    1. Practical difficulties (similar to those discussed by Wallace Chao).

    2. DCT undermines our understanding of moral agency (unique to Gearsome and Holmgren).

Problem 1: Which Theistic View to Adopt?

  • DCT proposes a universal, objective moral truth.

  • However, there are diverse religions with conflicting commands and understandings of deities.

  • The question arises: which religion provides the correct moral rules?

  • Historical conflicts between religious beliefs highlight this difficulty.

Interpretation of Religious Texts

  • Even within a chosen religion (e.g., Christianity), interpretation issues arise.

  • The Old Testament God differs significantly from the New Testament God.

  • Reliability concerns: The Bible has multiple authors and inaccuracies.

  • Differing interpretations of religious texts lead to irreconcilable views.

Problem 2: Impact on Moral Agency

  • Gearsome and Holmgren argue that DCT presents a problematic view of moral agency.

  • Ethics involves guiding and evaluating freely chosen human behavior which require:

    • Free will: The capacity to make choices.

    • Reason to overcome instincts.

DCT and Moral Agency

  • DCT implies that moral action is simply following God's commands ("God said so").

  • This eliminates the need to investigate why an action is morally right.

  • Gearsome and Holmgren emphasize the impact of DCT on humans as moral agents.

  • Free will involves not only choosing to follow a command but also recognizing why it is the morally correct action.

    • Moral responsibility includes articulating the reasons behind moral rules.

  • DCT cuts off this reasoning process, as the answer is always "because God said so."

    • This can lead to arbitrariness, similar to the moral ground view.
Analogy of Robots

  • DCT can make humans seem like robots programmed with a moral code.

  • Moral agents should be able to evaluate and identify the reasons for God's commands.

Resisting Commands
  • Gearsome and Holmgren state that it must be possible to evaluate the character, and identify the reasons that explain why god gave that command instead of some other one and divine command theory understood as you you don't get to ask that question because divine command theory just says because god said so.
The Nuremberg Defense

  • The Nuremberg trials illustrate the issue: Nazis who claimed they were "just following orders" were held responsible.

  • Moral agents are capable of resisting commands and should know better.

Understanding Moral Agency

  • It must be possible to evaluate the reasons behind commands.

  • Divine Command Theory doesn't allow this because the answer to "why is this the moral rule" is simply "because God said so".