Summarize the argument of one philosopher - Essay Example

November 3, Timmons Argument about Divine Command Theory The Divine Command Theory is based on the assumption or the idea that everything that is wrong or right is dictated by God’s commands. It disregards all other ideologies that would have been projected such as morality as to having a role in defining what is right. However, in this explanation, Simmons is quick to add that other moral theories or approaches to moral issues are wrong in their approaches to philosophical attention (p. 33), but that his offers the best explanation.

According to this theory an action becomes a moral obligation when it is given as a God’s command and so it should be followed without arguing or resistance. According to his explanation, this implies that to some people, the idea that God commands one not to do something will have a grave meaning or importance to their thinking that they will really have to consider that before coming to their conclusive decision. However, he is quick to add that the understanding of the idea one will have when deciding what is wrong or right does not serve the an answer to understanding what is morally right (p. 34). This means that a person should be made to understand why some things or actions are morally unacceptable rather than offering a template of do’s and don’ts as purported by the scriptures.

The idea of morality is left vague and according to ethical relativism, this has been catapulted by the fact that morality is quite so relative and depends on other factors such as location, age or culture. An action that is acceptable in a given locality may be totally absurd in another geographic location hence calling the attention of what is morally right. According to Miller, to deeply understand ethical relativism which tries to explain whether there is a universal norm or what is considered universally correct.

Therefore to conclude, an action can never be morally acceptable across all cultures or age groups. There are only moral norms that define or tie a certain group of people in a given society (p. 34). This forms the basis of moral relativism. However, as he explains, a norm may not be totally accepted in a society by all the members (p. 35). He uses abortion in the U.S. perspective to address this point. This makes moral relativism tough to understand. To address this confusion we agree that the rightness or wrongness of an action will be decided by other factors such as the harm they may inflict to someone’s physique or infringing on their privacy (p. 35). This is the basis of context sensitivity which explains the application or the sensitivity of an action in a given moral context.

Context sensitivity is compatible with all non-relativist moral theories and it supports the fact that what is morally right is defined by more than one factor which may include looking at the issue in the given context. Therefore to sum it up both divine command theory and ethical relativism conclude that the actions we do are dictated or depends on their acceptance by some authority which could be God or culture in this matter.Cited WorkTimmons Mark. Moral Theory: An Introduction. Elements of Philosophy.

New York: Rowman & Littlefield, 2002, p. 33-35.Miller, Christian. Divine Desire Theory and Obligation. Available at.