A review of two arguments against Divine Command theories

Khorram Panah, Yousef; Dadjoo, Yadollah; Akbarzadeh, Rajab

doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.22034/rs.2021.36209.1430

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

¹ Doktorand in Rechtsphilosophie an der Baqer al-Uloom University

² Associate Professor of Department of Islamic Philosophy and Theology, Payam Noor University, Qom.

³ Assistant Professor of Department of Islamic Philosophy and Theology, Payam Noor University, Qom.

http://dx.doi.org/10.22034/rs.2021.36209.1430

Abstract

The question of the relationship between religion and ethics dates back as far as the history of philosophy and thought, Among the theories on this issue, Divine Command theory has always had few supporters throughout history and has been severely criticized, In this article, we examine two arguments against this theory. The first argument is designed against Adams' theory, which is the most famous contemporary proponent of this theory, we have shown that Adams has serious problems responding to this argument, and then we examine a second argument recently made by some philosophers of religion and ethics, including Morrison, against this theory. Our claim in the article is that, firstly, although Adams's theory faces serious problems in the face of the first argument, it can defend its theory satisfactorily by making changes and corrections, such as those proposed by Wierenga. Secondly, by making objections to the defense of the proponents and opponents of the second argument, we have made it clear that none of them have succeeded in their efforts. This article uses an analytical method to judge the controversy between proponents and opponents of the two arguments against the Divine Command Theory.

Keywords

References

منابع

1- افلاطون، 1367، دوره آثار افلاطون، ترجمه محمد حسن لطفی و رضا کاویانی، چاپ دوم، تهران: انتشارات خوارزمی.

2- ابن احمد، عبدالجبار، 1962، المغنی فی ابواب التوحید و العدل، ج 6، قاهره: دارالمصریة لالتألیف و الترجمه.

3- حلّی، حسن بن یوسف، 1399، کشف المراد فی شرح تجرید الاعتقاد، بیروت: مؤسسة الاعلمی للمطبوعات.

4- شفق، نجیب الله، 1391، نظریه امر الهی اصلاح شده با تقریر رابرت آدامز، معرفت اخلاقی، 12، 5-24.

5- غفوریان، مهدی؛ صادقی، مسعود؛ حسینی، مالک، 1395، نظریه اصلاح شده امر الهی: دیدگاه آدامز در باب رابطه امر الهی و الزام اخلاقی، پژوهشنامه فلسفه دین، 28، 201-222.

6- موسوی، سیده منا؛ جوادی، محسن، 1388، راهکار رابرت مری هیو آدامز در دفاع از نظریه امر الهی، قبسات، 53، 113-138.

7- مصباح یزدی، محمدتقی، 1389، مجموعه آثار آیت الله مصباح یزدی (مشکات)-فلسفه اخلاق، تهران: شرکت چاپ و نشر بین الملل.

8- مصباح یزدی، محمد تقی، 1394، نقد و بررسی مکاتب اخلاقی، چاپ پنجم، قم: انتشارات موسسه آموزشی و پژوهشی امام خمینی ره.

9- Admas, Robert. (1987). The Virtue of Faith and Other Essays in Philosophical Theology, New York, USA: Oxford University Press.

10- Adams, Robert. (1999). Finite and Infinite Goods: A Framework for Ethics, New York, USA: Oxford University Press.

11- Brogaard, Berit and Salerno, joe. (2012). ‘Remarks on Counterpossibles’. Synthese. 190, 639-690.

12- Cudworth, Ralph. (1996). A Treatise Concerning Eternal and Immutable Morality, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

13- Davidson, Matthew, God and Other Necessary Beings, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2019 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2019/entries/god-necessary-being/>.

14- Davis, Richard and Franks, Paul, (2014). ‘Counterpossibles and the ‘Terrible’ Divine Command Deity’. Religious Studies, 51, 1-19.

15- Harrison, Gerald K. (2015). ‘The Euthyphro, Divine Command Theory and Moral Realism’, Philosophy, 90, 107 – 123.

16- Harrison, Gerald K. (2018). ‘Divine Command Theory and Horrendous Deeds: a Reply to Wielenberg’, Sophia, 57, 173-187.

17- Hill, Scott. (2012). ‘Richard Joyce's New Objection to the Divine Command Theory’. Journal of Religious Ethics, 38, 189-196.

18- Idziak, Janine Marie, 2010, Divine Command Ethics, in ‘A Companion to Philosophy of Religion’ Edited by C. Taliaferro, P. Draper, P. L. Quinn, Second Edition, Ch68, Sussex, Wiley-Blackwell.

19- Ichikawa, Jonathan, 2010, Explaining Away Intuitions, Studia Philosophica Estonica: 2.2, 94–116

20- Joyce, Richard. (2002). ‘Theistic Ethics and the Euthyphro Dilemma’. Journal of Religious Ethics. 30, 49-75.

21- Kment, B. (2006a). Counterfactuals and explanation. Mind, 115, 261–310.

22- Kment, B. (2006b). Counterfactuals and the analysis of necessity. Philosophical Perspectives, 20, 237–302.

23- Lampert, Fabio. (2019). ‘Wierenga on Theism and Counterpossibles’. Philosophical Studies. 176, 693-707.

24- Lewis, David. (1973). Counterfactuals, Massachusetts, USA: Harvard University Press.

25- McGrath, Matthew and Frank, Devin. (2018). Propositions. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2018 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2018/entries/propositions/>.

26- Miller, C. (2013). Euthyphro Dilemma. In International Encyclopedia of Ethics, H. Lafollette (Ed.).

27- Morris, Thomas. (1987). Anselmian Explorations, Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.

28- Morris, Thomas V. and Christopher Menzel, 1986, “Absolute Creation”, American Philosophical Quarterly, 23, 353–362.

29- Morriston, Wes. (2009). ‘What if God commanded something terrible? A worry for divine-command meta-ethics’. Religious Studies. 45, 249-267.

30- Morriston, Wes. (2012). ‘God and the ontological foundation of morality’. Religious Studies, 48, 15-34.

31- Murphy, Mark. (2019). Theological Voluntarism. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2019 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2019/entries/voluntarism-theological/>.

32- Murphy, Mark. (2012). ‘Restricted Theological Voluntarism’. Philosophy Compass, 10, 679–690.

33- Nolan, Daniel. (1997). ‘Impossible Worlds: A Modest Approach’. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, 38, 535-572.

34- Page, Ben. (2018). ‘Dis-positioning Euthyphro’, International Journal for Philosophy of Religion. 84, 31-55.

35- Pearce, K., & Pruss, A. (2012). ‘Understanding omnipotence’. Religious studies, 48, 403–414.

36- Sheridan, Patrica. (2016). Lock’s Moral Philosophy, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2020 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2020/entries/locke-moral/>.

37- Vander Laan, D. (2004). Counterpossibles and similarity. In F. Jackson & G. Priest (Eds.), Lewisian themes (pp. 258–276). Oxford: Oxford University Press

38- Weiss, Yale. (2017). ‘Semantics for Counterpossibles’. Australasian Journal of Logic, 14, 383-407.

39- Wielenberg, Erik. (2016). ‘Euthyphro and moral realism: a reply to Harisson’, Sophia, 55, 437-449.

40- Wierenga, Edward. (1983). ‘A defensible divine command theory’, Nous, 17, 387–487.

41- Wierenga, Edward. (1989). The Nature of God An Inquiry Into Divine Attributes. New York, USA: Cornell University Press.

42- Wierenga, Edward. (1998). ‘Theism and counterpossibles’. Philosophical Studies, 89, 87-103.

Jostarha-ye Falsafe-ye Din

A review of two arguments against Divine Command theories

References

References

Volume 9, Issue 2 - Serial Number 20
January 2020
Pages 169-195

A review of two arguments against Divine Command theories

References

References

Volume 9, Issue 2 - Serial Number 20January 2020Pages 169-195

Volume 9, Issue 2 - Serial Number 20
January 2020
Pages 169-195