Divine Command Theory vs. Ethical Relativism Explained
This paper examines two central topics in moral philosophy. First, it analyzes Divine Command Theory as a nonconsequentialist ethical system, identifying its key advantage—the simplicity of codifying actions as right or wrong—while exposing serious weaknesses, including the problem of competing scriptures, interpretive uncertainty, and the moral danger illustrated by the biblical story of Abraham and Isaac. Second, it distinguishes among ethical absolutism, ethical relativism, and cultural relativism, arguing that while cultural relativism is an empirical fact supported by sociology and anthropology, ethical relativism is a more contested normative claim that faces significant epistemological challenges in determining what any given society's morality actually permits.
- Introduction to Divine Command Theory: Defines DCT as nonconsequentialist and notes its simplicity
- Problems with Divine Command Theory: Abraham story reveals moral dangers of divine justification
- Ethical Absolutism Defined: One universal ethical standard by which all others are judged
- Cultural Relativism vs. Ethical Relativism: Distinguishes empirical cultural fact from normative moral claim
- Challenges of Ethical Relativism: Epistemological difficulty of defining any society's morality
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- Uses a well-known biblical narrative (Abraham and Isaac) as a concrete illustration of an abstract philosophical problem, making the argument accessible and memorable.
- Maintains careful conceptual distinctions, especially between cultural relativism (an empirical claim) and ethical relativism (a normative claim), demonstrating precision in philosophical terminology.
- Builds each critique logically, moving from one problem (scriptural authority and translation) to a deeper moral problem (justification of apparently immoral acts).
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates the philosophical technique of presenting a theory's apparent strength before systematically dismantling it through counterexample. In both sections, the author acknowledges what a given view gets right—Divine Command Theory's simplicity, cultural relativism's empirical grounding—before introducing layered objections that reveal deeper structural weaknesses.
Structure breakdown
The paper divides into two discrete responses. The first addresses Divine Command Theory, opening with a definition, acknowledging one benefit, then presenting two compounding criticisms culminating in the Abraham and Isaac case. The second response defines and distinguishes three related concepts—ethical absolutism, cultural relativism, and ethical relativism—before turning to an epistemological critique of ethical relativism using the examples of abortion and euthanasia.
Introduction to Divine Command Theory
Divine Command Theory is classified as a nonconsequentialist theory of morality because it is not grounded in the consequences or outcomes of specific actions. Instead, it holds that all actions possess an intrinsic rightness or wrongness determined by whether they conform to the dictates of God. While this approach offers certain advantages—most notably the simplicity of categorizing actions into a clear dichotomy of permitted and forbidden—it also carries several severe disadvantages that make it difficult to sustain as a workable ethical system.
One of the central difficulties concerns the source of the divine command. If divine moral commands are derived from scripture, how can one be certain that the scripture is being followed exactly? How can one be certain that it has been interpreted correctly—or, in many cases, translated correctly? Furthermore, given that numerous religious scriptures all claim to represent the actual and revealed word of God, how can one be certain of following the correct scripture? This problem is compounded by the conflicting moral imperatives that often appear within a single text, as well as the contradictions between different religious traditions.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.