Essay Example - The Euthyphro Dilemma

Thesis: The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the relationship between Socrates' question in the "Euthyphro Dilemma" and the Divine Command Theory of morality and to philosophical implications related to each problem arising from responding to the inquiry.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

In the "Euthyphro Dilemma," Socrates raises a fundamental question concerning religious ethics. An in-depth evaluation of this philosophical inquiry shows that regardless of how an atheist responds to this question, several problems will emerge. Furthermore, Socrates' research shows an intricate connection with the Divine Command Theory of morality. It is worth highlighting that the relationship between morality and religion has remained a controversial subject for a long time (Essien 145). Therefore, it follows that there is no consensus on how individuals' religious beliefs impact their moral lens.

A philosophical analysis of the major world religions shows that each has an explicit and implicit set of rules that govern human conduct.

The Ten Commandments in the Bible represent a classic example of how God creates rules that promote positive ethical behavior in society.

In Exodus 20:15, for instance, God instructed the Israelites never to steal (Tomasino 141).

The next aspect of the discussion is the philosophical inferences associated with each problem arising from responding to Socrates' question in the "Euthyphro Dilemma."

It is argued that if an atheist answers Socrates' question by asserting that the morally right behavior or conduct is willed by God mainly because they are desirable, the individual will encounter the independence problem. The question arises, if God condemns evil and that selfishness is a great evil, why then does he participate in such?

In other words, if God is responsible for influencing moral acts, it means that there must be a prior and autonomous moral good before God willed the subsequent ethical behavior.

This independent problem is inconsistent with the hypothesis of the Divine Command Theory, which is that the philosopher has to provide a second reply to the "Euthyphro Dilemma."

In the succeeding paragraph, the various problems developing from the atheist's second answer to Socrates' question are explored.

In case the atheist offers a second answer to the inquiry, maintaining that morally right behavior is ethically sound because it is willed by God,

The individual will experience a wide range of problems, including the question of objectionable commands, emptiness challenge, and the arbitrariness problem.

It cannot be urged that a person's morality is based on God's wishes. It is further contended that if Divine Command Theory offers factual information, it means that honesty neither informs nor sanctions God's command. Ethiopia's argument regarding good and evil has troubled many philosophers and Socrates concerning the divine power theory. In his evidence, evil is distorter of right, and thus evil and good are not opposing forces at the end of a view spectrum. Evil is the parasite of morality and ethics. Sin is not necessarily evil, like the divine theory dictates.

Euthyphro argues that evil and right have the same nature as God can command evil acts the same way that he commands good ones. If it is not to the consent of God, then evil could be doom; but God allows evil like he allows good acts. But in a dimension of evil is bad and punishable.

The two arguments describe the impossibility of God's command to humans if there is no backup information as to why te commands are the way they are. However, the divine interpreters argue that each action has to be done as commanded. Philosophers and scholars have left n a controversial choice of the conquest of divinity and immutable facts.

The next paragraph provides a conclusion statement, a summary of the discussion, and final observations.

It is clear from the preceding discussion that the correlation between Socrates' question in the "Euthyphro Dilemma" and the Divine Command Theory of morality is a challenging task because there is no general agreement about the relationship between morality and religion. Notably, the atheist's answer to Socrates' inquiry raises several other problems that are difficult to address.

A key observation about this discussion is that to effectively explore the different philosophical implications associated with each option in the "Euthyphro Dilemma," one must have a sufficient understanding of the critical points in the Divine Command Theory.

It is clear from the previous discussion that the correlation between Socrates' question in the "Euthyphro Dilemma" and the Divine Command Theory of morality is a challenging task because there is no general agreement about the relationship between morality and religion.

A key observation about this discussion is that to effectively explore the different philosophical implications associated with each option in the "Euthyphro Dilemma," one must have a sufficient understanding of the critical points in the Divine Command Theory.

From the biblical statement that God is good has a dilemma per the philosophical approach. Socrates argues that God has the character of goodness, but goodness is not God but an attribute of God.

If an atheist is to respond to this statement, it loses the tautology meaning. The atheists will argue that if God is good, then right is God, which means that God is God, and likewise good is good. Therefore the divine theory and the Euthyphro dilemma get into a contradicting fact.

Whatever the case, the issue of God and goodness will get into more problems. If Socrates' statement "God is good" stands over the Euthyphro philosophy, then non-Socrates will argue that if God is good to enforce his words and commands like the condemnation of murder, then why did that same God diminish sinners in the same bible? For example, in the time of issuing these same commands at mount Sinai, most people perished. The argument either shows God's supremacy or a reduction of his goodness in executing supremacy.

This is the pint of the dilemma as Socrates will argue that God is divine, and his acts are just while non-Socrates view killing as an arbitrary against the same law and moral ethics.

The discussion of the Euthyphro dilemma can be based on theoretical aspects but practicality. The divine theory is only applicable to the willing recipient, and therefore evil and good relies on personal choice and interpretation of the supreme laws. The bible and go do dictate on the deeds of humans, but the ethic of morality is the critical dictation to the reactions and actions that humans make.

There can only be one chance to a choice, and the selection tends to be more of experience to morality rather than dictation. Although it is the routine of Socrates to argue that God is the source of moral ethics, an atheist will say that morality is a form of personal choice. In this token, lays down a point that people who do good are are ad so are those who do evil. Therefore the gap between God and evil is not God and his commands but is of priority, instincts, and choice.

Sin, as described by the divine command theory, is a fall short of perfect ct action, which raises another factual conflict of gods' omnipotence. The Euthyphro dilemma argues that there must be a better nature of evil rather than sin. In this better explanation of crime, God can be included. In essence, corruption is the act to gear the command of cruelty for persona gain. And by the same biblical aspect, it is evident that God is a selfish go who does some actions for personal benefit.

Another case of the Euthyphro dilemma is the understanding of omnipotence. The divine theory lays arguments that God is all present in any form and anywhere. However, the dilemma bases the practicality of the argument and nullifies this postulation. This dilemma leaves philosophers confused about the reality of the omnipresence. Biblical evidence shows the availability of God at various unexpected places and indeed in different forms.

The divine command theory postulates that God is all-powerful and can do all things. Epthpral argues that the word 'all' has a definitive meaning that God is capable of doing everything. By this, all things mean evil and good. But in the same case, the command by God is on positivity. This point is an area of self-conflict within the command theory and, more importantly, a confusion point to philosophers and scholars who try to analyze the dilemma and, at the same time, the theory.

Work Cited

Essien, Essien, ed. Handbook of Research on the Impact of Culture in Conflict Prevention and Peacebuilding. IGI Global, 2020.

Tomasino, Anthony J. Written Upon the Heart: The Ten Commandments for Today's Christian. Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2008.