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

European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 4 (1):177-195 (2012)
  Copy   BIBTEX

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.

Author's Profile

Jeremy Koons
Georgetown University

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-03-10

Downloads
1,316 (#8,110)

6 months
197 (#12,818)

Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?