Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Moral obligations are identical with divine commands — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Divine Attributes
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Moral obligations are identical with divine commands

    Divine AttributesNatural Theology
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Moral obligations must be motivating and objective
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Moral obligations must provide a basis for critical evaluation of other types of obligations
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Moral obligations must be such that someone who violates a moral obligation is appropriately subject to blame
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kant demonstrates that genuine moral obligation requires autonomy: acting from self-legislated rational principle, not external command.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Obligations grounded in divine commands are heteronomous, reducing moral agents to subjects of imperatives rather than authors of moral law.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A motivation structure dependent on divine sanction conflates moral obligation with prudential compliance, undermining the categorical nature of moral duty.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.If moral obligations are identical with divine commands, then God cannot have moral reasons for issuing commands, making morality arbitrary (Euthyphro).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A being whose commands constitute rather than reflect goodness lacks the evaluative standard needed to be called morally authoritative.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Divine AttributesNatural Theology

    Connections

    2 topics

    Justice & Punishment3 linkedMoral Responsibility3 linked

    Related

    A being whose commands constitute rather than reflect goodness lacks the evaluat...A motivation structure dependent on divine sanction conflates moral obligation w...Divine commands best satisfy these desiderata for moral obligationsIf moral obligations are identical with divine commands, then God cannot have mo...
    +5 moreShow less
    Kant demonstrates that genuine moral obligation requires autonomy: acting from s...Moral obligations must be motivating and objectiveMoral obligations must be such that someone who violates a moral obligation is a...Moral obligations must provide a basis for critical evaluation of other types of...

    Similar

    If moral obligations are identical with (or grounded in or caused to e...89%On divine command theory, moral obligations are grounded in God's comm...87%Awareness of moral obligations is therefore awareness of God's command...85%Moral obligations are expressions of God's will, commands, or preferen...83%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: moral-arguments-god
    View source passageHide passage
    Notice that the DCT Adams defends in his later work is ontological rather than semantic: it is a claim that moral obligations are in fact identical with divine commands, not a claim that “moral obligations” has the same meaning as “divine commands.” On his account, applying the work of direct reference theorists like Hilary Putnam and Saul Kripke to the arena of ethics, the meaning of “moral obligation” is fixed by the role this concept plays in our language. That role includes such facts as the
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Obligations grounded in divine commands are heteronomous, reducing moral agents ...
    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit