{"id":662,"date":"2025-03-13T18:56:35","date_gmt":"2025-03-13T18:56:35","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppscphi1012ethics\/chapter\/5-1-divine-command-theory\/"},"modified":"2025-03-31T20:16:59","modified_gmt":"2025-03-31T20:16:59","slug":"5-1-divine-command-theory","status":"publish","type":"chapter","link":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppscphi1012ethics\/chapter\/5-1-divine-command-theory\/","title":{"raw":"5.1\u00a0Divine Command Theory","rendered":"5.1\u00a0Divine Command Theory"},"content":{"raw":"
\r\n

Divine Command Theory starts out\u00a0as a reflection on the nature of moral language and on this basis develops a comprehensive theory of morality. The first thing it points out about moral or ethical language is that it takes the form of rules governing behavior. These rules are expressed as commands, such as \u201cDon\u2019t lie,\u201d \u201cDon\u2019t steal from other people,\u201d and \u201cYou should never cheat, especially not on your ethics exams.\u201d Now commands, as opposed to statements, are neither true nor false, so we cannot simply investigate the world to see whether they are correct or not. Instead the way we determine which commands are \u201ccorrect\u201d is by figuring out which ones we really should listen to, which ones are truly binding on us and most importantly why? Why should we accept and act on the claims that some things are obligatory for us to do, while some other things are permissible, and some other things forbidden?<\/p>\r\n\r\n

\r\n

According to divine command theory<\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/header>\r\n

\r\n
    \r\n \t
  • Moral principles tell us what we\u00a0should\u00a0do.<\/li>\r\n \t
  • Commands are meaningless without authority to back them up.<\/li>\r\n \t
  • The universal scope of moral commands requires divine backing.<\/li>\r\n \t
  • Moral rules such as \u201cDo not kill,\u201d really mean \u201cGod commands us not to kill.\u201d<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n

    This theory claims that\u00a0moral commands are binding on us only to the extent there is some kind of actually existing authority figure behind them who determines that we should obey his her or its dictates. That is, for moral commands to really become obligations for us we need someone or something that can make them stick and give us a reason to accept them as such. On this view commands can only get their binding power from an enforcing authority, and the stronger that authority is, the more binding the commands are. This is not an unfamiliar idea. Why is it necessary for the police to patrol highways looking for people driving faster than the speed limit? Well, obviously, if nobody were around to enforce the rules of the road, many more people would violate them and it would be unsafe to drive on public roads. It is the real threat of punishment by people with the authority to enforce the rules that keeps us in line. The same goes for morality in general, or so the backers of Divine Command Theory claim.<\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>","rendered":"

    \n

    Divine Command Theory starts out\u00a0as a reflection on the nature of moral language and on this basis develops a comprehensive theory of morality. The first thing it points out about moral or ethical language is that it takes the form of rules governing behavior. These rules are expressed as commands, such as \u201cDon\u2019t lie,\u201d \u201cDon\u2019t steal from other people,\u201d and \u201cYou should never cheat, especially not on your ethics exams.\u201d Now commands, as opposed to statements, are neither true nor false, so we cannot simply investigate the world to see whether they are correct or not. Instead the way we determine which commands are \u201ccorrect\u201d is by figuring out which ones we really should listen to, which ones are truly binding on us and most importantly why? Why should we accept and act on the claims that some things are obligatory for us to do, while some other things are permissible, and some other things forbidden?<\/p>\n

    \n
    \n

    According to divine command theory<\/p>\n<\/header>\n

    \n
      \n
    • Moral principles tell us what we\u00a0should\u00a0do.<\/li>\n
    • Commands are meaningless without authority to back them up.<\/li>\n
    • The universal scope of moral commands requires divine backing.<\/li>\n
    • Moral rules such as \u201cDo not kill,\u201d really mean \u201cGod commands us not to kill.\u201d<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

      This theory claims that\u00a0moral commands are binding on us only to the extent there is some kind of actually existing authority figure behind them who determines that we should obey his her or its dictates. That is, for moral commands to really become obligations for us we need someone or something that can make them stick and give us a reason to accept them as such. On this view commands can only get their binding power from an enforcing authority, and the stronger that authority is, the more binding the commands are. This is not an unfamiliar idea. Why is it necessary for the police to patrol highways looking for people driving faster than the speed limit? Well, obviously, if nobody were around to enforce the rules of the road, many more people would violate them and it would be unsafe to drive on public roads. It is the real threat of punishment by people with the authority to enforce the rules that keeps us in line. The same goes for morality in general, or so the backers of Divine Command Theory claim.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"author":101,"menu_order":1,"template":"","meta":{"pb_show_title":"on","pb_short_title":"","pb_subtitle":"","pb_authors":[],"pb_section_license":""},"chapter-type":[],"contributor":[],"license":[],"class_list":["post-662","chapter","type-chapter","status-publish","hentry"],"part":874,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppscphi1012ethics\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/662","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppscphi1012ethics\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppscphi1012ethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/chapter"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppscphi1012ethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/101"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppscphi1012ethics\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/662\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1179,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppscphi1012ethics\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/662\/revisions\/1179"}],"part":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppscphi1012ethics\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/parts\/874"}],"metadata":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppscphi1012ethics\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/662\/metadata\/"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppscphi1012ethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=662"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"chapter-type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppscphi1012ethics\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapter-type?post=662"},{"taxonomy":"contributor","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppscphi1012ethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/contributor?post=662"},{"taxonomy":"license","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppscphi1012ethics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/license?post=662"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}