Welcome to Atheist Discussion, a new community created by former members of The Thinking Atheist forum.

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Ethics: Divine Command Theory
#26

Ethics: Divine Command Theory
Let's clarify things here. As somebody (Thump, I think) recently put it: dictionary definitions help us understand words... but not reality. The word "whim" is artificially making the issue murkier than it needs to be. So let's clarify.

When you make a determination, decision, or judgement, you either have a rationale for it or you don't.

We can say that you have urges to play games and a rationale for doing chores... that's the typical situation. But playing games might actually be the most logical decision. Let's say you are overworked, and the team needs you to be at your best tomorrow at the office. Relaxing and playing games might be the more rational thing to do if you are feeling burned out. After all, you need to be well-rested so that you can tackle a pending project at work.

Also, it's worth noting, either choice can only be "more rational" if you assume the invisible premise "we ought to strive toward the best state of affairs." Which is a premise I hold as axiomatically true.... as I assume you do. Unless, of course, God wishes a worse state of affairs. Then all bets are off.

Any decision you make either has a rationale or it doesn't. So let's make two new categories so we don't get tripped up on words like "whim" and "arbitrary." Those categories are: "rational" and "non-rational." All things based on impulse, on one's nature etc. fall into the category of non-rational (category 1). Things based on reason, fall into another (category 2). Now, what I would like is an explanation of how an item in category 1, when it determines something or is involved in judgment can be anything other than arbitrary. The chores/games example didn't convince me. If there is a third option I'm not considering, I need more explanation.

***

Let's consider God for a moment. Christians want to say "God is Good." So "goodness" is a part of God's nature. But did God "create himself" as good? Was it a choice he made? Or was he just spontaneously good, and had no control over it? Or did God make a determination about what "good" is? The DCT theorist wants to say the latter. But you see the issue here, right?

You're not going to trip me up on gender issues, so I'd advise not going that route. It's a cheap tactic anyway... very transparent. One's gender is not a decision, judgement, or determination that a person makes. It's something they're stuck with. You having the prejudice of it being a choice is making you advance a weak argument. But I concede this point: if a person were CHOOSING their gender, and they didn't use a rationale, then such a choice would be arbitrary. It would be so by necessity.
Reply
#27

Ethics: Divine Command Theory
(08-03-2021, 05:31 AM)vulcanlogician Wrote: Any decision you make either has a rationale or it doesn't. So let's make two new categories so we don't get tripped up on words like "whim" and "arbitrary." Those categories are: "rational" and "non-rational." All things based on impulse, on one's nature etc. fall into the category of non-rational (category 1). Things based on reason, fall into another (category 2). Now, what I would like is an explanation of how an item in category 1, when it determines something or is involved in judgment can be anything other than arbitrary. The chores/games example didn't convince me. If there is a third option I'm not considering, I need more explanation.

You try to push things into two categories, but you broke one of those into two sub-categories: the arbitrary, and one's nature. Instead of 1a, 1b and 2, just number those 1, 2 and 3 and you've got your third option.

1. Impulse/whim/randomness - arbitrary
2. Nature (something they're stuck with, as you say below)
3. Reason

Quote:Or was he just spontaneously good, and had no control over it? Or did God make a determination about what "good" is? The DCT theorist wants to say the latter.

The former is pretty much saying that goodness is his nature, which is my position, and I'm the DCT guy here.

Quote:You're not going to trip me up on gender issues, so I'd advise not going that route. It's a cheap tactic anyway... very transparent. One's gender is not a decision, judgement, or determination that a person makes. It's something they're stuck with.

Trip you up? I was trying to get you to recognize and/or admit to the fact that intelligent beings have a nature which leads to behaviors which are neither rational nor arbitrary. Now you seem to see it. "Something they're stuck with" is the same as saying it's their nature.
Reply
#28

Ethics: Divine Command Theory
We're getting somewhere. But many Christians are reluctant to say that God is "stuck with" his good nature. They want to say his goodness is something that he wills.

I think viewing "goodness" as a distinguishable part of God's nature suggests that goodness (as a notion) exists independently God. The same could be said of power. Christians claim that God is powerful. But power is something we see in certain people, in hurricanes, etc. Power, as a concept exists independently of God. The only thing that associates him with it is that he is said to have a lot of it. Same could be said of goodness.

Anyway, what is your response to my earlier thought experiment?


Quote:Did God forbid theft and rape for arbitrary reasons? That's what the Divine Command Theorist says. And furthermore, let's consider a hypothetical where God lifted the ban on rape. I bet many people, many nations, and many Christians would still want to say that there's something wrong with rape. They wouldn't want it done to their family members. They'd want to keep government laws against it in place.

In this hypothetical, people would want to say that rape is wrong independently of God's (hypothetical) indication to the contrary. What would your response be to someone who said "there is still something morally wrong with rape, despite God's lifting of the prohibition"? Wouldn't their case seem reasonable? And if their case IS reasonable, doesn't that suggest there are good reasons to see morality as something independent of God's commands?
Reply
#29

Ethics: Divine Command Theory
(08-03-2021, 12:22 PM)vulcanlogician Wrote: We're getting somewhere. But many Christians are reluctant to say that God is "stuck with" his good nature. They want to say his goodness is something that he wills.

I don't answer for "many Christians." If you have a question for me, ask it.

Quote:In this hypothetical, people would want to say that rape is wrong independently of God's (hypothetical) indication to the contrary. What would your response be to someone who said "there is still something morally wrong with rape, despite God's lifting of the prohibition"? Wouldn't their case seem reasonable? And if their case IS reasonable, doesn't that suggest there are good reasons to see morality as something independent of God's commands?

No, their case wouldn't seem reasonable. The problem with this approach is that you try to make a change in a vacuum. You need to consider the consequences of the change.

Man was created in the image of god. The fall corrupted that, but it's still there to some extent, notably in the conscience. If god thought rape and stealing were appropriate, people would mostly think so too, as the conscience would be different in that world. Or, if god were capricious in nature, people wouldn't have a common foundation of morality at all in such world.
Reply
#30

Ethics: Divine Command Theory
(08-03-2021, 01:54 PM)Percie Wrote:
(08-03-2021, 12:22 PM)vulcanlogician Wrote: We're getting somewhere. But many Christians are reluctant to say that God is "stuck with" his good nature. They want to say his goodness is something that he wills.

I don't answer for "many Christians." If you have a question for me, ask it.


Are they wrong, then?


Quote:Man was created in the image of god. The fall corrupted that, but it's still there to some extent, notably in the conscience. If god thought rape and stealing were appropriate, people would mostly think so too, as the conscience would be different in that world. Or, if god were capricious in nature, people wouldn't have a common foundation of morality at all in such world.

Nobody knows to what extent (or exactly how) man was made in God's image. There are obviously differences (omnipotence, for example), and then some supposed similarities. Since God never shows himself, we can't make a side-by-side comparison to find out which of man's features were modelled after God and which weren't. It's convenient for you to say they are similar in moral understanding, but no specific piece of evidence (or scripture) specifically corroborates this.

I say scripture is a leery guide for us to use anyway. After all, Christians who oppose DCT will cite Genesis 1:4 "And God saw that the light was good..." to argue that goodness is independent of God... that God, like a carpenter who has fashioned a table, looks over his work and recognizes he's done a good job. After all, he didn't say "Of course it's good-- I made it." The phrasing in Genesis suggests that goodness is independent of God, something by which God measures his own work.

And then you could reply, "But elsewhere in the Bible it says x." and because the Bible can be made to say many contrary things, it is of no use in determining the truth. So let's eschew the theological approach.

I have to concede some basic things to you as far as using scripture. After all, if it weren't for the claims in your book, you'd have ZERO to go on. But I have to draw the line at huge guesses as to what is meant by "God's image." Let's do our best to keep focused on the issue of a great cosmic being existing somehow dictates what moral facts are.
Reply
#31

Ethics: Divine Command Theory
(08-04-2021, 02:30 AM)vulcanlogician Wrote: Are they wrong, then?

Make their argument yourself in greater detail and we can discuss.

Quote:Nobody knows to what extent (or exactly how) man was made in God's image. There are obviously differences (omnipotence, for example), and then some supposed similarities. Since God never shows himself, we can't make a side-by-side comparison to find out which of man's features were modelled after God and which weren't.  It's convenient for you to say they are similar in moral understanding, but no specific piece of evidence (or scripture) specifically corroborates this.

Romans 2
14 For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, 15 in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them,

Quote:I say scripture is a leery guide for us to use anyway. After all, Christians who oppose DCT will cite Genesis 1:4 "And God saw that the light was good..." to argue that goodness is independent of God... that God, like a carpenter who has fashioned a table, looks over his work and recognizes he's done a good job. After all, he didn't say "Of course it's good-- I made it." The phrasing in Genesis suggests that goodness is independent of God, something by which God measures his own work.

Light isn't good in a moral sense. God saw that the light was good for his purposes in creation.

Quote:And then you could reply, "But elsewhere in the Bible it says x." and because the Bible can be made to say many contrary things, it is of no use in determining the truth. So let's eschew the theological approach.

I have to concede some basic things to you as far as using scripture. After all, if it weren't for the claims in your book, you'd have ZERO to go on. But I have to draw the line at huge guesses as to what is meant by "God's image." Let's do our best to keep focused on the issue of a great cosmic being existing somehow dictates what moral facts are.

Er, no, I'm a Christian and am arguing from a Christian viewpoint. Arguing for now, anyway. I'm getting tired of you trying to just wave off every argument that you can't counter.
Reply
#32

Ethics: Divine Command Theory
(08-04-2021, 02:30 AM)vulcanlogician Wrote: Let's do our best to keep focused on the issue of a great cosmic being existing somehow dictates what moral facts are.

So why do you keep bringing up what "many Christians" supposedly know?
Reply
#33

Ethics: Divine Command Theory
I'm pretty sure God doesn't command, require, or forbid anything. If God commanded or expected anything from humanity, he would have need. If he had need, he would be anxious and insecure because then he would be in a perpetual state of constantly not getting what He wants. God can't love if he commands things from you or forbids you to do anything.
Reply
#34

Ethics: Divine Command Theory
(05-29-2023, 09:25 PM)Kathryn E Wrote: I'm pretty sure God doesn't command, require, or forbid anything.  If God commanded or expected anything from humanity, he would have need.  If he had need, he would be anxious and insecure because then he would be in a perpetual state of constantly not getting what He wants.  God can't love if he commands things from you or forbids you to do anything.

Sounds more and more like you made up your own god in place of the christian god in the bible.
[Image: color%5D%5Bcolor=#333333%5D%5Bsize=small%5D%5Bfont=T...ans-Serif%5D]
The following 5 users Like Dom's post:
  • Alan V, TheGentlemanBastard, Deesse23, Inkubus, adey67
Reply
#35

Ethics: Divine Command Theory
(05-29-2023, 09:44 PM)Dom Wrote: Sounds more and more like you made up your own god in place of the christian god in the bible.

Maybe God is a different from the God you find in the Bible.
Reply
#36

Ethics: Divine Command Theory
(05-29-2023, 10:13 PM)Kathryn E Wrote:
(05-29-2023, 09:44 PM)Dom Wrote: Sounds more and more like you made up your own god in place of the christian god in the bible.

Maybe God is a different from the God you find in the Bible.

Sounds like yours is. So, if you are not following the christian god, which one are you following?
[Image: color%5D%5Bcolor=#333333%5D%5Bsize=small%5D%5Bfont=T...ans-Serif%5D]
The following 2 users Like Dom's post:
  • Cavebear, adey67
Reply
#37

Ethics: Divine Command Theory
(05-29-2023, 09:44 PM)Dom Wrote:
(05-29-2023, 09:25 PM)Kathryn E Wrote: I'm pretty sure God doesn't command, require, or forbid anything.  If God commanded or expected anything from humanity, he would have need.  If he had need, he would be anxious and insecure because then he would be in a perpetual state of constantly not getting what He wants.  God can't love if he commands things from you or forbids you to do anything.

Sounds more and more like you made up your own god in place of the christian god in the bible.

Or, never really read her buy-bull and is relying on others to tell her what she wants to hear.
[Image: Bastard-Signature.jpg]
The following 1 user Likes TheGentlemanBastard's post:
  • Szuchow
Reply
#38

Ethics: Divine Command Theory
(05-29-2023, 09:25 PM)Kathryn E Wrote: I'm pretty sure God doesn't command, require, or forbid anything.  If God commanded or expected anything from humanity, he would have need.  If he had need, he would be anxious and insecure because then he would be in a perpetual state of constantly not getting what He wants.  God can't love if he commands things from you or forbids you to do anything.

"I'm pretty sure God doesn't command, require, or forbid anything".

Ever read the 10 commandments? The OT or the NT? The christian (and other) deities IS/ARE the commander, requirer, and forbidder. And actually, "by definition". You crack me up...
Never try to catch a dropped kitchen knife!
The following 1 user Likes Cavebear's post:
  • adey67
Reply
#39

Ethics: Divine Command Theory
Quote:I'm pretty sure God doesn't command, require, or forbid anything.

Sure he does.... it's right there in your own book.


Quote:Numbers 15:32-36


King James Version




32 And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day.
33 And they that found him gathering sticks brought him unto Moses and Aaron, and unto all the congregation.
34 And they put him in ward, because it was not declared what should be done to him.
35 And the Lord said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp.
36 And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the Lord commanded Moses.


This god guy sounds like a real dick.
Robert G. Ingersoll : “No man with a sense of humor ever founded a religion.”
The following 1 user Likes Minimalist's post:
  • adey67
Reply
#40

Ethics: Divine Command Theory
(05-29-2023, 09:25 PM)Kathryn E Wrote: I'm pretty sure God doesn't command, require, or forbid anything.
How do you know?

(05-29-2023, 09:25 PM)Kathryn E Wrote:  If God commanded or expected anything from humanity, he would have need.  If he had need, he would be anxious and insecure because then he would be in a perpetual state of constantly not getting what He wants.  
Maybe thats exactly what/how he is, esoecially as depicted in the bible.
So, how.do.you.know?
R.I.P. Hannes
Reply
#41

Ethics: Divine Command Theory
People have been trying to redefine God for centuries to avoid the kinds of moral problems the Bible presents. None of the redefinitions have worked either.

The "God is love" concept, for instance, fails in the face of the world we actually inhabit, with all of its disproportionate suffering and arbitrary natural disasters.
The following 1 user Likes Alan V's post:
  • adey67
Reply
#42

Ethics: Divine Command Theory
god demands, commands, and requires its massive ego to be stroked, continuously. god is far more narcissistic and shallow then the silly little upright apes that invented it. Why do hoomans think god has a pecker? One does not need a dick, to be one.
Reply
#43

Ethics: Divine Command Theory
(05-29-2023, 09:25 PM)Kathryn E Wrote: I'm pretty sure God doesn't command, require, or forbid anything.  If God commanded or expected anything from humanity, he would have need.  If he had need, he would be anxious and insecure because then he would be in a perpetual state of constantly not getting what He wants.  God can't love if he commands things from you or forbids you to do anything.

You're wrong then. Space Hitler command, require and forbid quite a number of things. To give you a small sample*:

  1. Genesis
    1. Have dominion over every living thing.  1:26 (779)
    2. Replenish the earth.  1:28 (780)
    3. Subdue the earth.  1:28 (781)
    4. Be fruitful and multiply.  1:28 (603)
    5. Be a vegan.  1:29 (910)
    6. Don't eat blood.  9:4 (912)
    7. Kill whoever kills another person.  9:6 (544)
    8. Be an omnivore.  9:34 (911)
    9. Circumcise the flesh of your foreskin.  17:10 (649)
    10. Circumcise boys eight days after their birth.  17:12 (650)
    11. Circumcise your male slaves.  17:13 (651)
    12. Cut off any uncircumcised male.  17:14 (576)
    13. Don't spill your seed on the ground.  38:7 (604)
    14. Don't be wicked (or evil) in the sight of the Lord.  38:7 (17)
You simply created your personal brand of woo. Not that you differ much from rest of "christians" who believe anything but what's written in their book of fairy tales.

*https://skepticsannotatedbible.com/ejat/all.html
There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance.


Socrates.
Reply
#44

Ethics: Divine Command Theory
(05-30-2023, 06:22 AM)Deesse23 Wrote: Maybe thats exactly what/how he is, esoecially as depicted in the bible.
So, how.do.you.know?

Enter into the idea for a bit that a God out there does exist.  If said being does exist, isn't it a little humorous if he's just up there with his panties in a twist all the time?
Reply
#45

Ethics: Divine Command Theory
(05-31-2023, 09:04 AM)Kathryn E Wrote:
(05-30-2023, 06:22 AM)Deesse23 Wrote: Maybe thats exactly what/how he is, especially as depicted in the bible.
So, how.do.you.know?

Enter into the idea for a bit that a God out there does exist.  If said being does exist, isn't it a little humorous if he's just up there with his panties in a twist all the time?
Argument from consequence. Just because you dont like this particular version of a god, does not mean he does not exist this way. I am not saying you are wrong, i am saying that based on your argument we cant conclude you are right.

You posited that (paraphrasing) "A god would not be anxious and insecure...". I asked how do you know? You replied: "Because i dont like the idea of an anxious and insecure god". Thats a bad argument, a very bad one.

I repeat: How do you know that a god* is not anxious, insecure or cruel, stupid, jealous, or anything else you dislike. The original writings in the books of the bible depict him as exactly that. You cant just dismiss this original source and make claims about god based on your preferences aka feelings.
Reality, including a god, exists as it is, and it does not care if you find it to be particularly likeable.




* ill grant its existence for sake of the argument
R.I.P. Hannes
The following 2 users Like Deesse23's post:
  • Alan V, Cavebear
Reply
#46

Ethics: Divine Command Theory
(08-03-2021, 05:31 AM)vulcanlogician Wrote: Also, it's worth noting, either choice can only be "more rational" if you assume the invisible premise "we ought to strive toward the best state of affairs." Which is a premise I hold as axiomatically true.... as I assume you do. Unless, of course, God wishes a worse state of affairs. Then all bets are off.

There is no universal agreement on what is the *best* state of affairs. Very often, ethically, we are left with the *better* of two evils, and which path is chosen depends on the who is making the decision.
Any decision can be rational, according to you, yet not "feel right", and thus be rejected. We see this every time the Ethics Committee is convened, where I work. What is "rational" also depends on what system and standard of ethics one thinks is best for oneself. There are vast number of ethical systems.

***
Quote:Let's consider God for a moment. Christians want to say "God is Good." So "goodness" is a part of God's nature.
But did God "create himself" as good? Was it a choice he made? Or was he just spontaneously good, and had no control over it? Or did God make a determination about what "good" is? The DCT theorist wants to say the latter. But you see the issue here, right?

That's not the problem for me. If they want to say their (timeless) deity is "good" then they are faced with Euthyphro's Dilemma.
It also means, that ALONG with their deity's reality, also ... concurrently, reality was larger than just their god(s). Furthermore that deity was not evil, eternally, thus there is a defined segment of reality which by definition, always also existed in reality, and in which the deity is *required* not to  participate in, (and also a portion it MUST participate in. Thus the question is not "did god create himself", but "where did reality come from", in which there is (for a believer) a god which concurrently always existed with features/definitions which HAD to exist also, along with the deity, and in which he could not participate in, and must participate in. A real "creator god" would have had to be the total of reality eternally, If "god is good", or which can be defined in any way, he is not the creator of reality, and for the origins of reality, we would have to look beyond any god I've every seen described.
Test
The following 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post:
  • pattylt, vulcanlogician
Reply
#47

Ethics: Divine Command Theory
(05-31-2023, 06:53 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote: There is no universal agreement on what is the *best* state of affairs.

Agreed. But so what?

Quote:There are vast number of ethical systems.

There may be a vast number of ethical systems, but, like, there aren't a vast number of them I take seriously. The plausible solutions are the one's I consider mostly, vast as the ultimate number of solutions may be.

Quote:That's not the problem for me. If they want to say their (timeless) deity is "good" then they are faced with Euthyphro's Dilemma.

I agree. You basically said better what I was trying to say.
Reply
#48

Ethics: Divine Command Theory
(05-31-2023, 09:04 AM)Kathryn E Wrote:
(05-30-2023, 06:22 AM)Deesse23 Wrote: Maybe thats exactly what/how he is, esoecially as depicted in the bible.
So, how.do.you.know?

Enter into the idea for a bit that a God out there does exist.  If said being does exist, isn't it a little humorous if he's just up there with his panties in a twist all the time?

I have sometimes considered the possibility. Rational thought always refutes the idea. Well, maybe He wears knit boxer underpants. They are much more comfortable. Wink

But seriously, have you ever considered the idea that He doesn't? Most theists can't or won't (the idea being too disturbing). Maybe the universe could exist without a deity... There is evidence for that. We find more evidence of non-intelligent and non-intention every year. What there isn't any evidence for is any deity.
Never try to catch a dropped kitchen knife!
The following 1 user Likes Cavebear's post:
  • pattylt
Reply
#49

Ethics: Divine Command Theory
(06-01-2023, 08:50 PM)vulcanlogician Wrote: Agreed. But so what?

You said "we ought to strive toward the best state of affairs."
and "There may be a vast number of ethical systems, but, like, there aren't a vast number of them I take seriously. The plausible solutions are the one's I consider mostly, vast as the ultimate number of solutions may be."

You failed to tell us what are the criteria for what you take seriously ... your ethics.
Nor did you defend those criteria.
Without that, this is meaningless.
Test
Reply
#50

Ethics: Divine Command Theory
(05-29-2023, 09:25 PM)Kathryn E Wrote: I'm pretty sure God doesn't command, require, or forbid anything.  If God commanded or expected anything from humanity, he would have need.  If he had need, he would be anxious and insecure because then he would be in a perpetual state of constantly not getting what He wants.  God can't love if he commands things from you or forbids you to do anything.

Non-existent beings can't command anything.  Deadpan Coffee Drinker
“Religion is excellent stuff for keeping common people quiet. 
Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich.”
― Napoleon Bonaparte
The following 1 user Likes Chas's post:
  • pattylt
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)