Chapter 5 - Morality and Religion (Blackboard)

Understanding Divine Command Theory

• Definition: Divine command theory posits that actions are morally right or wrong based on whether they are commanded by God.
• Example: In the Old Testament, God initially commands Noah and his descendants not to eat meat but later permits it under specific conditions (Genesis 9:3-4).

Key Aspects of Divine Command Theory

• Historical Context: This theory is historically significant in discussions of morality under religious belief.
• Application Across Religions: The concept is universal; it applies to any deity (e.g., God, Zeus, Allah) with appropriate commands.
• Core Idea: Morality is dependent upon God's commands, meaning that without a deity, notions of right and wrong cease to exist.

The Euthyphro Dilemma

• Origin: Introduced by Socrates in Plato's dialogue "The Euthyphro."
• Key Question: "Do the gods love actions because they are pious, or are actions pious simply because the gods love them?"
• Rephrased for Divine Command Theory: "Does God tell us to do right because it is right, or is it right because God says it is?"

Unsatisfactory Alternatives in the Dilemma

• Option 1: If right exists independently of God's commands, then divine command theory collapses. This implies a moral standard external to God.
• Option 2: If we say that actions are right solely because of God's commands, it raises concerns about God's nature, suggesting He could arbitrarily declare immoral actions as right.
• Implications of Option 2: This could imply God might command morally reprehensible acts like torture, challenging the notion of God as a perfect being.
• Perfect Being's Rationality: Belief in God's perfection necessitates rationality in His commands, suggesting that right and wrong might exist beyond God's will.

Changing Moral Commandments

• Example of Dietary Laws: God's command about meat consumption changes based on circumstances, suggesting that moral standards can evolve.
• Rationale for Change: Initial prohibitions may have practical reasons (e.g., health, safety), which can become irrelevant over time.

Implications for Moral Education

• Teaching Morality: Can moral teachings be divorced from divine command? Shafer-Landau suggests promoting moral behavior should rely on intrinsic understanding rather than fear of divine punishment.
• Teaching without Theology: A moral framework that does not depend on the existence of God is necessary for broader acceptance across differing belief systems.
• Moral Independence: Morality does not necessitate a common theological belief, as evidenced by differing interpretations among believers and non-believers.

Common Misunderstandings and Challenges

• Biblical Interpretations: Variances in interpreting passages (e.g., “Thou shalt not kill”) reflect how moral instructions are applied differently in society.
• Scriptural Conflicts: Different beliefs about morality lead to diverse interpretations within the same religious tradition.
• Importance of Dialogue: Engaging in discussions about moral beliefs must be done respectfully to avoid shutting down conversation.

Non-Theological Moral Arguments

• Importance of Reason: Moral arguments should explore rational, non-theological bases for morality to foster understanding among individuals with diverse beliefs.
• Engagement in Moral Discourse: Non-theological discussions are often more productive when addressing moral disagreements.

Summary and Reflective Questions

• Should moral teachings rely heavily on religious texts?
• What implications does this debate have for raising children with a moral compass that is independent of specific religious doctrine?
• How do personal convictions influence perceptions of others' beliefs in a diverse moral landscape?