Utilitarianism and divine command theory

Utilitarianism and divine command theory

Utilitarianism and divine command theory are based on different beliefs concerning ethics and morality. Utilitarianism divines is based on the claim that an act is considered morally good if its outcomes are desirable. On the other hand, divine command theory argues that an act is morally good if it goes hand in hand with what God commands. The differences and similarities between utilitarianism and divine command theory are found in their definition of what is and is not morally good.

The definition of what is morally good differs between ethical theories and that depends on the beliefs held by the advocates of each theory. Utilitarianism is based on the claim that an act can be defined as being morally good or wrong depending on its outcomes. Generally, utilitarianism argues that an action should only be chosen if it produces general good to the largest number of people involved. On the other hand, divine command theory bases its definition of moral goodness on God’s command. Advocates of divine command theory belief that everything that God commands is ethically good irrespective of the outcomes associated. Generally, the two theories differ in their definition of moral goodness. Moreover, utilitarianism and divine command theory have several things in common.

Utilitarianism and divine command theory are not entirely different and their similarities have been identified in their arguments. Both theories create uncertainties and leave a lot of unanswered questions. For example, utilitarianism argues that an act is morally good if its outcomes are desirable. However, the future is uncertain and the outcomes of an act cannot be known with certainty. On the other hand, divine command theory is based on the claim that an act is morally good if it is in line with God’s command. However, not everything is recorded and people depend on interpretations from similar situations, which might lead to uncertainties. Moreover, the theories are different in different aspects and that can be used to choose which theory is stronger and should be chosen to solve an ethical dilemma.

A strong ethical theory should have the least weaknesses and chances of dilemma. The divine command theory is a stronger ethical theory compared to utilitarianism, which has several weaknesses. Utilitarianism is based on the claim that an act should be assessed depending on its outcomes. However, it is difficult to know with certainty whether an outcome is good or bad. Also, justice and human rights might be compromised if utilitarianism is used to assess ethics. For example, a case of organ transplant might be unethical if the theory of divine command theory is used especially where it involves the death of the organ donor. Utilitarianism might however argue that killing one person to save four people is for the good of many. Such an act is however unethical and makes the theory unethical.

In sum, utilitarianism and divine command theory are found to be either different or similar in their definition of what is and is not morally good. Utilitarianism is based on the claim that an act can be defined as being morally good or wrong depending on its outcomes. The divine command theory argues that everything that God commands is ethically good irrespective of the outcomes associated. The divine command theory is stronger because it has fewer limitations than the utilitarianism theory.