Should God Determine Right or Wrong?

(Credits):

-employer: Florida South Western State College

-written by tgthewriter1

Truman
PHI 2600 Ethics
February, 21 2015

Should God Determine Right and Wrong?

Is the Divine Command Theory right or wrong? The Divine Command Theory is a theory that is based on commandments that are made by God (Rahimi, 551). God determines what is right and what is wrong for a person to do. The Divine Command Theory can be rejected by replacing God’s commandments with emotions (Johnson, 506). Some philosophers believe that emotions help humans decide what is right and wrong (Johnson, 506). I think the Objection is fatal to the Divine Command Theory because certain situations can cause humans to act differently. The Divine Command Theory is a method that has been practiced for a long period of time, but there is someone who believes that right and wrong are based on human emotions.





According to the Divine Command Theory, God determines what is right and what is wrong (Rahimi, 551). The theory also suggests that God’s commandments are the foundation for eternal truth (Rahimi, 551). Everything that is said by God is the eternal truth. There are no other divine principles that speak the truth except for God’s principles (Rahimi, 551). If a person question’s God’s commandments then that person is wrong.God’s commandments were created for people to know what is wrong and what is right.

Also, the Divine Command Theory is how people determine what actions are right and what actions are wrong (Rahimi, 551). For example, a person stealing from another person is wrong because God’s commandments say that it is wrong for a person to steal. Another example, God’s commandments say that it is wrong for a person to lie which makes it wrong for a person to lie to another person. A person who believes in the Divine Command Theory will only know that an action is right if it is listed in God’s commandments. If an action is not listed in God’s commandments then a person will not know if that action is right or wrong. God’s commandments also determine how a society should judge whether a person’s action is right or wrong. If a person performs an action that goes against God’s commandments then a society who believes in Divine Command Theory will automatically assume that the action is wrong.

There is an objection to the Divine Command Theory that suggests that right and wrong is not determined by God’s commandments but by people’s emotions (Johnson, 506). Linda Zagzebski created a theory that suggested that right and wrong is determined by human emotion (Johnson, 506). According to Zagzebski, an emotion is a perception of what person feels is right or wrong (Johnson, 506). Emotions often start with a motive, which is a reason to perform an action (Johnson, 506). Emotions come from feelings inside humans that can be right or wrong. Emotions can make humans perform an action that is necessary. Some actions are good or bad depending on the intent of the emotion. If the emotion’s intent is good then there is a possibility that the end result of a person’s action will also be good (Johnson, 506). God’s commandments are not necessary if people can understand their emotions. If people have good intentions then God’s commandments is no longer necessary. Zagzebski’s theory on how humans can tell right from wrong based on emotions is reasonable, but is emotion the best way to determine if a person’s action is right or wrong.

If Zagzebski’s theory on human emotions is correct then all humans need to determine if an action is right or wrong is emotions. However, determining if an action is right or wrong is not 100 percent accurate when determined by emotions (Johnson, 506). Emotions are based on perception which is based on what one person or group thinks is right (Johnson, 506). What one person or group thinks is right may not be right to another person or group because of a different way of thinking. Determining right and wrong based on emotions eliminates the need for God, but creates a new concept which is what person or group is more right.

Zagzebski’s objection to the Divine Command Theory is a huge problem because it eliminates the need to follow God. If humans do not need God to tell them right and wrong, then God is no longer needed. If God is no longer needed to control humans, then there is a possibility that God is not the eternal truth and that the Divine Command Theory is false. Zagzebski’s objection to the Divine Command Theory suggests that maybe God does not exists. The nonexistence of God would indicate that the Divine Command Theory does not exists. If God does not exist, then God’s commandments do not exist. It would also indicate that God might have been created by man.

I personally believe that the Divine Command Theory is reasonable in some ways and not reasonable in other ways. Every person has to deal with a different life situation. Depending on what life situation a person has to deal with, a person has a right to commit an act that the person feels is right. Zagzebski’s theory on determining right and wrong based on emotions is very reasonable. I believe that emotions warn humans of danger most of the time. There are times where an emotional feeling that a person feels is false, but for the most part that emotion is telling a human something. A good emotion often means that a human has intent to do a good action or feels good about an action that was done. If humans follow their emotions then there is no need to follow God’s commandments.
However, there is no guarantee that emotions can determine the right action. The Divine Command Theory does keep humans in control, but it only works when humans abide by the rules that are given. If humans do not abide by God’s commandments to determine right and wrong, then humans must follow their emotions to determine right and wrong. But, if humans do not agree to either their emotions or Divine Command Theory, then the existence of right and wrong will no longer exist. In conclusion, I believe that right and wrong is determined by what a person believes and anything less is a concept that has no meaning or existence.





Works Cited
Johnson, Daniel M. "THE OBJECTIVITY OF OBLIGATIONS IN DIVINE MOTIVATION THEORY: On Imitation And Submission." Journal Of Religious Ethics 40.3 (2012): 504-517. Academic Search Complete. Web. 23 Feb. 2015.
Rahimi, Simin. "Divine Command Theory And Theistic Activism." Heythrop Journal 53.4 (2012): 551-559. Academic Search Complete. Web. 23 Feb. 2015.

Paid from florida south western college