Compare And Contrast Metaethical Theories Now

Compare And Contrast Metaethical Theoriesthread Now That You H

Compare and contrast metaethical theories. Now that you have learned about competing ethical theories, write a thread that compares and contrasts a Christian ethical theory with a competing ethical theory. Since we have already looked at ethical relativism in DB 1, you should choose from any theory in the Moral Reasoning textbook except ethical relativism. That means you can choose from Virtue Ethics, Natural Law, Ethical Egoism, Utilitarianism, Duty Ethics, Social Contract Theory, and Moral Realism (or any combination of these) in contrast to a Christian ethical theory such as Divine Command, Divine Nature, or Christian Revelational Ethics (or a combination of these). How do these each system define “the good”? How does each claim to know “the good”? What, if anything, do these systems have in common? What, if anything, are their key differences? Which theory do you think is the stronger ethical theory? Defend your answer. This final question should take up the majority of your thread. Be sure to carefully define your terms.

You are expected to support your position with rational arguments, fitting examples, and expert sources. Any quotes or information used from sources other than yourself must be cited using footnotes in current Turabian format and will not count towards the total word count. You will be penalized for falling short or exceeding the word count. This is a university-level writing assignment and therefore it must be carefully proofread, free of grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors. Do not use slang, emoticons, or abbreviations (as if you are texting or sending an email to a friend).

You are expected to cite at least one academic source in your DB threads and replies. These sources would include the course textbooks, books, journal articles, periodicals, and similar publications. Sources such as Wikipedia and online dictionaries do not count as academic sources and should not be used. Biblical references are encouraged, but will not count as an academic source.

Paper For Above instruction

The comparison of Christian ethical theory, particularly Divine Command Theory (DCT), with utilitarianism offers insight into differing foundational perspectives on morality, truth, and the good. DCT, rooted in the belief that moral obligations are commanded by God, holds that what is morally right is what God commands, and the good is defined by divine will. Conversely, utilitarianism, a consequentialist theory developed by Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, defines the good as the maximization of overall happiness or pleasure and the minimization of pain. Here, morality is judged based on outcomes rather than divine decree, and knowledge of the good is derived through empirical observation of consequences (Mill, 1863).

In DCT, the foundation of morality rests on divine authority. Morality is objective, grounded in God's nature and commands, which are considered inherently good. The believer recognizes the good through divine revelation, scripture, and spiritual discernment. For example, the Ten Commandments exemplify divine commands that define moral duties (Exodus 20). This gives DCT a strong sense of moral objectivity rooted in divine sovereignty.

Utilitarianism, by contrast, seeks to determine the good through rational calculation of pleasure and pain. The approach aims to produce the greatest happiness for the greatest number, emphasizing empirical and scientific methods to evaluate consequences. This system claims to know the good through evidence and reason, assessing actions based on their outcomes rather than divine authority (Mill, 1863).

Both systems aim to establish a standard for moral decision-making and seek an objective account of the good. They acknowledge that moral truths exist, but their sources differ—divine authority in Christian ethics and empirical/consequentialist reasoning in utilitarianism. They also emphasize impartiality and the importance of moral reasoning, yet they diverge significantly on the basis of morality: divine command versus outcome-based calculations.

Despite these differences, both theories share some commonalities. They attempt to provide universal standards for morality, reject relativism, and advocate for moral agents to seek the best interests of others, whether through divine commands or consequences. Both also recognize the importance of moral reasoning processes in ethical decision-making.

Key differences include the source of moral authority—divine revelation versus human reason—and the criteria for moral actions—obedience to God's commands versus maximizing happiness. This distinction influences their approach to moral dilemmas and their perceived moral objectivity. For example, in situations where divine commands conflict with utilitarian calculations, DCT prioritizes divine authority, while utilitarianism emphasizes outcomes.

Assessing which theory is stronger depends on one's foundational beliefs. From a Christian perspective, DCT offers a compelling account grounded in divine sovereignty and moral absolutes. However, critics argue that divine command theories may lead to moral dilemmas or conflicts with human reasoning. Utilitarianism, while practical and adaptable, faces criticisms regarding justice and rights, as maximizing happiness may sometimes permit actions that violate individual rights (Mill, 1863).

In my view, Christian divine command theory provides a more coherent and morally objective foundation because it grounds morality in an unchanging divine nature, offering moral absolutes that are not subject to human opinion or consequential fluctuations. Although utilitarianism is pragmatic, its reliance on empirical outcomes can undermine justice and moral integrity in complex situations. For instance, sacrificing innocent individuals to maximize overall happiness poses significant ethical problems, which divine commands explicitly prohibit.

Therefore, I argue that a Christian ethical framework, particularly divine command theory, holds superior moral clarity and consistency. It aligns morality with the character and will of God, offering believers a stable and transcendental standard for moral actions, whereas utilitarianism's calculative approach risks sacrificing moral integrity for aggregate happiness. This strength makes divine command theory a more compelling and ethically sound system.

References

• Mill, J. S. (1863). Utilitarianism. Parker, Son, and Bourn.
• Engelhardt, H. T. (1996). The Foundations of Christian Ethics. Oxford University Press.
• Craig, W. L. (2003). Reasonable Faith: Christian Truth and Apologetics. Crossway Books.
• Kulker, B. (2009). Divine Command Ethics. In R. B. Adams & J. L. Adams (Eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Christian Ethics. Wiley-Blackwell.
• Hare, R. M. (1981). Moral Thinking. Oxford University Press.