Can God’s Goodness Save the Divine Command Theory from Euthyphro?

Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Recent defenders of the divine command theory like Adams and Alston have confronted the Euthyphro dilemma by arguing that although God’s commands make right actions right, God is morally perfect and hence would never issue unjust or immoral commandments. On their view, God’s nature is the standard of moral goodness, and God’s commands are the source of all obligation. I argue that this view of divine goodness fails because it strips God’s nature of any features that would make His goodness intelligible. An adequate solution to the Euthyphro dilemma may require that God be constrained by a standard of goodness that is external to Himself -- itself a problematic proposal for many theists.
Keywords
No keywords specified (fix it)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
KOOCGG
Upload history
Archival date: 2018-03-14
View other versions
Added to PP index
2017-03-10

Total views
679 ( #7,024 of 58,209 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
135 ( #3,979 of 58,209 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.