A semantic attack on divine-command metaethics

Sophia 43 (2):15-28 (2004)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

According to divine-command metaethics (DCM), whatever is morally good or right has that status because, and only because, it conforms to God’s will. I argue that DCM is false or vacuous: either DCM is false, or else there are no instantiated moral properties, and no moral truths, to which DCM can even apply. The sort of criticism I offer is familiar, but I develop it in what I believe is a novel way.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,202

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

A Critique of Graber's Divine Command Theory of Ethics.John P. Reeder Jr - 1975 - Journal of Religious Ethics 3 (1):157 - 163.
Divine Command Morality and Jewish Tradition.Avi Sagi & Daniel Statman - 1995 - Journal of Religious Ethics 23 (1):39 - 67.
Divine Command Morality and the Autonomy of Ethics.Robert Audi - 2007 - Faith and Philosophy 24 (2):121-143.
Divine Simplicity and Divine Command Ethics.Susan Peppers-Bates - 2008 - International Philosophical Quarterly 48 (3):361-369.
Ockham as a divine-command theorist.Thomas M. Osborne - 2005 - Religious Studies 41 (1):1-22.
Ockham as a Divine-Command Theorist.Thomas M. Osborne Jr - 2005 - Religious Studies 41 (1):1 - 22.
Divine Command Metaethics Modified Again.Robert Merrihew Adams - 1979 - Journal of Religious Ethics 7 (1):66 - 79.
Another Step in Divine Command Dialectics.Alexander R. Pruss - 2009 - Faith and Philosophy 26 (4):432-439.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
101 (#166,629)

6 months
5 (#544,079)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Stephen Maitzen
Acadia University

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references