Even despite his creation of the world if we are to agree and follow God’s guidance without question this theory shows us that we are actually instead only undermining God’s goodness. Another major issue with the Divine Command Theory is the non–moral commandments listed in the Bible. If we were to strictly abide by the theory we would have to follow every command God makes as if it were moral code. Certain commands God makes are still applicable in every day life, the 10 commandments and even others can easily be followed by a dedicated individual. However it is when non-moral commands come to play where the DCT begins to lose its meaning.
How Plato’s “Euthyphro” illustrates the toxic relationship between pride and ignorance. I would first like to start this essay off with a parable that was told to me during a fundamentals of communication class a few years ago during my sophomore year here at university. I believe the main philosophical message found in this parable really highlights that of what Socrates was anticipating Euthyphro would eventually realize in their dialogue about the true definition of piety. The story goes as followed one day a very knowledgeable college professor who specialized in buddhism had a guest speaker over to visit and to lecture to the class. The guest speaker happens to be a buddhist monk.
The discourse of Socrates and Euthyphro In Euthyphro, Plato recites a conversation Socrates has with Euthyphro by “the Porch of the King” (Plato, 41). The Greek philosopher and his religious interlocutor Euthyphro mainly talk about the true meaning of piety, although it is less of a conversation and more of Socrates challenging Euthyphro, after the latter claimed that he knew everything about religious matters, and therefore piety. Socrates explains his need for Euthyphro to teach him by explaining that this would help him defend himself against the “indictment” he faces because of Meletus (Plato, 45). In the discourse of Socrates and Euthyphro, I find the exchange quite daunting because Socrates does most of the talking and therefore he is inclined to be leading. This brings me to question how a discourse should really be done.
The divine command theory means that what is morally right is judged and decided by the gods. Socrates questions Euthyphro’s belief in pleasing the gods to be “pious” by stating, “They have differences of opinion, as you say, about good and evil, just and unjust, honourable and dishonourable: there would have been no quarrels among them, if there had been no such differences – would there now?” (119). Even though Euthyphro answers that “pious” must mean that it is pleasing to all gods, it is obvious that actions will mean different things to different gods. The gods then are different from the God now, and without a constant definition of “God”, Euthyphro’s definition of “piety” would not be the same in different cultures and not be a universal answer that applies to all. In the society in which Socrates lives in, the people’s moral values and thinking is dominated by the predisposition of the existence of the Greek gods.
“You may do as you like, Since apparently the laws of the gods mean nothing to you.” (Sophocles, et al. 192). This argument, though quite passive aggressive, is more ethical. The religion of the people of Ancient Greece was held to the utmost of importance, which is why such epics are written about them when someone dares to defy them. In this case, Antigone calls out Ismene for choosing to obey the rule of Creon rather than the rule of the gods.
In his article Religion and The Queerness of Morality, he explores the idea that morality, in a Russellian world, is considered to be an absurdity. However, in tying morality back to Christianity, concludes that morality that is tied to God is not the deepest thing and is merely “provisional and transitory” (Mavrodes, 226). Transitory to what? I do not believe to be capable of possessing such an answer to
Euthyphro’s father and relatives were angry on him for prosecuting his own father, the family members think that it is impious for a son to prosecute father for murder. Explaining piousness to Socrates, Euthyphro argued “The pious is to do what I am doing now, to prosecute the wrongdoer, be it about murder or a temple robbery or anything else, whether the wrongdoer is your father or your mother or anyone else.” He further argued that Zeus is the best and most just of gods and that he bonds his father because he unjustly swallowed his sons and he castrated his father for similar reasons. After these statements, Socrates objection for piousness started, Socrates questioned Euthyphro that there are other pious actions also apart from this one he further added that to his question that any action of ours or another’s is pious and if it is not that it is not. In these chunks of questions Socrates was trying to identify meaning of piousness in the eyes of Euthyphro. It became clearer for Socrates when Euthyphro replied “What is dear to God is pious, what is not is impious.” It was showing that for Euthyphro piousness is related to the
The chapter focuses on and follows the dialogue between the two philosophers as they delve into the true meaning of piety and impiety as a means to figure out how Socrates can defend himself in court. The dialogue between Socrates and Euthyphro starts off on the Porch of the King Archon and it is revealed that they are both involved in court cases. Socrates is being accused of having corrupted the youth and Euthyphro is trying his father for the murder of a serf. Socrates has sought out his dear friend’s help because he yearns to better understand the nature of piety. Despite the many ways that Euthyphro could have chosen to respond, he explains it as “doing as [he is] doing” (18).
What if it is not our job to carry out this penalty, and it is God’s job to do the judging and penalizing. Since we must choose, I believe most people would argue against the death penalty under Religious Ethics. As a Christian, we are taught to often forgive those that sin against us. Forgiveness is a very strong theme throughout the Bible, and I believe that under religious ethics, most would believe that we need to leave it up to God to make those decisions, it is unethical for us to play God. Lastly, Dual-life value Ethics would