Divine Command Theory: Crash Course Philosophy #33
video description
Date: 2022-04-04
Related videos
Comments and reviews: 10
DP
Huh. The Euthryphro dilemma seems better suited to the Greek pantheon then the Christian God. In Christianity, God is considered omnibenevolent, but also omnipresent and omniscient. The hypothetical where God just changes his mind makes absolutely no sense in this context, as he's all knowing, all the time. If this is the case, the standard for goodness (being like God) is static. So while Socrates arguments was quite logical, he wasn't even talking about the same concept as the Christian God.
Also, while God is static, what things mean to a culture is not. If in one language a harmless word (say it means 'apple') is actually a slur in another language, its not like everyone who says apple in the first culture is sinning. It's not what you say (or how you dress) that makes it a sin, it's what it signifies. Gold chains, braids, tattoos, and the mixing of fabrics means something different in one culture then it does in another, and there is a whole field of research digging into the setting of Ancient Israel and Roman Palestine to understand what was meant by the commands. The meaning is then taken and reapplied to the modern context. If tattoos were associated with paganism at the time, what are symbols of modern idolatry that we shouldn't promote?
That doesn't make the divine command theory easy. Theodicies are still not enough for many people. I just feel the video misrepresented what the divine command theory really means and where the dilemma in it really is.
reply
Huh. The Euthryphro dilemma seems better suited to the Greek pantheon then the Christian God. In Christianity, God is considered omnibenevolent, but also omnipresent and omniscient. The hypothetical where God just changes his mind makes absolutely no sense in this context, as he's all knowing, all the time. If this is the case, the standard for goodness (being like God) is static. So while Socrates arguments was quite logical, he wasn't even talking about the same concept as the Christian God.
Also, while God is static, what things mean to a culture is not. If in one language a harmless word (say it means 'apple') is actually a slur in another language, its not like everyone who says apple in the first culture is sinning. It's not what you say (or how you dress) that makes it a sin, it's what it signifies. Gold chains, braids, tattoos, and the mixing of fabrics means something different in one culture then it does in another, and there is a whole field of research digging into the setting of Ancient Israel and Roman Palestine to understand what was meant by the commands. The meaning is then taken and reapplied to the modern context. If tattoos were associated with paganism at the time, what are symbols of modern idolatry that we shouldn't promote?
That doesn't make the divine command theory easy. Theodicies are still not enough for many people. I just feel the video misrepresented what the divine command theory really means and where the dilemma in it really is.
reply
Filaretos
Here is how the dilemma is ended-
1. God by definition IS omnipotent, it is what we mean when we use the term -god. -
2. Because he is omnipotent he is the principle without principle and the source of every other principle, including morality.
3. Being the source of morality, what he decrees is objectively good.
4. Therefore, all his commands are good.
5. Now, because all his commands are good, he will not command that which contradicts what he has already commanded, because that would mean he is subject to change, which means he is acted upon by outside sources, making him imperfect and therefore not omnipotent.
6. The reconciliation of the goodness of the commands of God is the recognition that all his commands resolve themselves in a universal good.
7. For example, I tell my son it is wrong to deceive others. But then I tell him to lie about where he will be tomorrow at 5 pm to his mother. Seems hypocritical and inconsistent. Except that we are having a surprise party for his mother. Did I fail my son as a father in terms of moral consistency? Let us ask something analogous to God- If he is God and the source of Good and all his acts are good, then any contradiction we see is merely apparent and will resolve itself in a universal good.
reply
Here is how the dilemma is ended-
1. God by definition IS omnipotent, it is what we mean when we use the term -god. -
2. Because he is omnipotent he is the principle without principle and the source of every other principle, including morality.
3. Being the source of morality, what he decrees is objectively good.
4. Therefore, all his commands are good.
5. Now, because all his commands are good, he will not command that which contradicts what he has already commanded, because that would mean he is subject to change, which means he is acted upon by outside sources, making him imperfect and therefore not omnipotent.
6. The reconciliation of the goodness of the commands of God is the recognition that all his commands resolve themselves in a universal good.
7. For example, I tell my son it is wrong to deceive others. But then I tell him to lie about where he will be tomorrow at 5 pm to his mother. Seems hypocritical and inconsistent. Except that we are having a surprise party for his mother. Did I fail my son as a father in terms of moral consistency? Let us ask something analogous to God- If he is God and the source of Good and all his acts are good, then any contradiction we see is merely apparent and will resolve itself in a universal good.
reply
RidaAlrubaye
Talking about the first horn of the dilemma, we can compare ethical values with the laws of physics and nature. The video asks what we would do if god suddenly changed his commandments to be the opposite and told us to abide by them. Well in contrast I could say; what would we do if, say, the force of gravity suddenly flipped around one day and became a repelling force the pushes us and everything away from the main body of gravity -for example the earth-. Would it even make sense to have any preparations for such an event? No, because we know that the laws of physics have always been consistent enough for us to discard such a possibility completely, and the same applies to ethical values. Once they have been created, they well remain constant and consistent forever making it ok to ultimately follow his commandments in the first place. I-d love to hear a counter argument if anyone has one.
reply
Talking about the first horn of the dilemma, we can compare ethical values with the laws of physics and nature. The video asks what we would do if god suddenly changed his commandments to be the opposite and told us to abide by them. Well in contrast I could say; what would we do if, say, the force of gravity suddenly flipped around one day and became a repelling force the pushes us and everything away from the main body of gravity -for example the earth-. Would it even make sense to have any preparations for such an event? No, because we know that the laws of physics have always been consistent enough for us to discard such a possibility completely, and the same applies to ethical values. Once they have been created, they well remain constant and consistent forever making it ok to ultimately follow his commandments in the first place. I-d love to hear a counter argument if anyone has one.
reply
Ryan
I accept the second horn, and I'd add that the problems posited here are solvable if one contemplates the purpose of life and the nature of God. I'm a creationist, but I'm not an ex-nihlo creationist: I believe that God created the world from matter that was, is, and will always exist. The same goes for morality. Humanity's purpose, or rather God's purpose for humanity, is to learn that divine way of life that God lives. We need religion because God is the only truly trustworthy source to find the tenants of the law he lives. So while morality has always existed, we need revelation to find it, and we need experience in trying to apply it. The more we apply, the more like God we become. That is the purpose of life.
reply
I accept the second horn, and I'd add that the problems posited here are solvable if one contemplates the purpose of life and the nature of God. I'm a creationist, but I'm not an ex-nihlo creationist: I believe that God created the world from matter that was, is, and will always exist. The same goes for morality. Humanity's purpose, or rather God's purpose for humanity, is to learn that divine way of life that God lives. We need religion because God is the only truly trustworthy source to find the tenants of the law he lives. So while morality has always existed, we need revelation to find it, and we need experience in trying to apply it. The more we apply, the more like God we become. That is the purpose of life.
reply
Flying
A dilemma is of the form A vs Not A. It is a false dilemma if it is of the form A vs B vs C. Euthyphro's dilemma is a false dilemma that can be resolved by seeing that God's nature IS the good. The good is not arbitrated by God bc he cannot defy his own nature (A, and the good doesn't exist outside of God (B. It also doesn't mean that it's impossible for God to do evil, it's just that He -would- not. No dilemma, no internal inconsistencies, Divine Command Theory still stands but at least we are all educated on the traditional attacks. Thanks Crash Course!
reply
A dilemma is of the form A vs Not A. It is a false dilemma if it is of the form A vs B vs C. Euthyphro's dilemma is a false dilemma that can be resolved by seeing that God's nature IS the good. The good is not arbitrated by God bc he cannot defy his own nature (A, and the good doesn't exist outside of God (B. It also doesn't mean that it's impossible for God to do evil, it's just that He -would- not. No dilemma, no internal inconsistencies, Divine Command Theory still stands but at least we are all educated on the traditional attacks. Thanks Crash Course!
reply
education
-I only read one book, but it's a good book don't you know. I act the way I act because the good book tells me so. If I wanna know how to be good, it's to the good book that I go, because the good book is a book and it is good and it's a book. I know the good book is good because the good book says it's good. I know the good book knows it's good because a really good book would. You wouldn't cook without a cookbook so I think it's understood: You can't be good without the good book because it's good and it's a book. -
Tim Minchin, The Good Book.
reply
-I only read one book, but it's a good book don't you know. I act the way I act because the good book tells me so. If I wanna know how to be good, it's to the good book that I go, because the good book is a book and it is good and it's a book. I know the good book is good because the good book says it's good. I know the good book knows it's good because a really good book would. You wouldn't cook without a cookbook so I think it's understood: You can't be good without the good book because it's good and it's a book. -
Tim Minchin, The Good Book.
reply
Mark
My mind, like all minds on all possible worlds, theorizes cause. This is inherent to all minds because this is what minds are for. God may or may not have a body, but God has a mind. God understands cause. Unleashing poison gas on infants is an unjust act in all possible worlds, because every possible mind in our universe would fathom that the infants had done nothing to deserve such consequences. There is no possible way God could indorse the murder of infants with poison unless god became unjust individual.
A bad god - devil.
reply
My mind, like all minds on all possible worlds, theorizes cause. This is inherent to all minds because this is what minds are for. God may or may not have a body, but God has a mind. God understands cause. Unleashing poison gas on infants is an unjust act in all possible worlds, because every possible mind in our universe would fathom that the infants had done nothing to deserve such consequences. There is no possible way God could indorse the murder of infants with poison unless god became unjust individual.
A bad god - devil.
reply
Tim
I like this video. It is worth mentioning, though, that the handling of those biblical references made them seem ridiculous. Context is king. Some mild investigation into theology reduces the absurdity.
Of course reasonable people could still disagree, but wrenching excerpts from ancient texts, heck even some modern ones, can make sensible things seem ridiculous.
reply
I like this video. It is worth mentioning, though, that the handling of those biblical references made them seem ridiculous. Context is king. Some mild investigation into theology reduces the absurdity.
Of course reasonable people could still disagree, but wrenching excerpts from ancient texts, heck even some modern ones, can make sensible things seem ridiculous.
reply
Matti
Is there some standard of goodness which God has to stick to? Yes. His nature. He is good and He can't deny Himself. He is just so He has to do the judgement. He is holy so we sinners can't hang out with with Him face to face. Etc. It is not something that God has created or someone else, it is God that is what He is.
reply
Is there some standard of goodness which God has to stick to? Yes. His nature. He is good and He can't deny Himself. He is just so He has to do the judgement. He is holy so we sinners can't hang out with with Him face to face. Etc. It is not something that God has created or someone else, it is God that is what He is.
reply
RAIMUNDO
I'm a big fan of the series, but this is by far the most biased episode. For example, he mentions God commanded Abraham to kill his son, but didn't mention he stopped Abraham before he killed him because he was testing him. Another example is he never explains why the verses he mentions are non binding now a days.
reply
I'm a big fan of the series, but this is by far the most biased episode. For example, he mentions God commanded Abraham to kill his son, but didn't mention he stopped Abraham before he killed him because he was testing him. Another example is he never explains why the verses he mentions are non binding now a days.
reply
Add a review, comment
Other channel videos
