Introduction to Ethics: Moral Skepticism & Divine Command Theory

Part 1: Introduction 

Plato’s Allegory of Cave and its Meaning 

Plato introduced the allegory of cave theory to illustrate human awareness about information. Plato indicated that knowledge gained using senses such as hearing or seeing is just opinion, and actual wisdom can be gained using philosophical intellect. The ‘Allegory of The Cave’ creates a distinction of individuals who make mistakes on sensory information and knowledgeable individuals. The allegory of cave can different meanings depending on the application. The cave is a representation of the individuals who believe that knowledge is gained from what is seen or heard in the surrounding, that is, empirical evidence. Empirical evidence traps people in a “cave” of misunderstanding. Such individuals do not seek to explore more and learn about something to gain more knowledge besides what they see or hear (Peterson, 2017). The cave can explain people who refuse to embrace the error of enlightenment and technological and prefer to remain in the past era.   

When a person is imprisoned in the cave, they cannot be able to see what is beyond them, except the shadows and illusions. However, there are some few individuals who can escape the cave. Once the prisoner is freed, they look for light, and they may get hurt before adjusting to the light. When a prisoner of cave is forced out, they feel anger and pain as the information they gain is overwhelming. Adjustment to information or light over time creates enlightenment, and the individual is able to understand the surrounding. The cave represents ignorance and people who are not willing to get educated. The light is wisdom, which is gained through research and interest in learning about the surrounding. Gaining philosophical knowledge is essential in life at it places a person at a better place to understand the world and surroundings.  

Ethics 

Ethics is a philosophical branch describing the differences between concepts of right and wrong. The concept is used in resolving human morality questions through the definition of good and evil, justice and crime, right and wrong, and virtue and vice. Ethics can be understood through, meta-ethics, applied, and normative ethics. Meta-ethics is about the determination of actual values of moral suggestions. Normative ethics helps to determine the practical approach of a right course of action. Applied ethics illustrates rules that guide the course of action. Ethics is used in solving dilemma when an individual is caught between their beliefs, and what could be considered as wrong or right, some rules can help solve the dilemma by directing the path to be taken (Kagan, 2018). Virtue ethics guide behavior that people should adopt to assist in doing right, for instance, honesty, caring and others. Consequentialism ethics describes the correctness or wrongness of activities depending on the outcome. Utilitarianism is a form of ethics that indicates that the right action maximizes the positive effects, happiness, and welfare of most people.       

I believe that I am an ethical person. I do not harm people intentionally with my words or actions, and if I make a mistake, I have to apologize. I contribute to the betterment of others, both at school and in the community through programs that help maximize the welfare of the people around me. When I make mistakes, I always admit, correct it and move on instead of regretting something that I cannot change. I treat others the ways I would like to be treated, such as showing love, empathy, care, and being honest. I tell the truth when needed, instead of covering something using lies only to end up hurting people around me.   

Part II: Ethical Theory 

Moral Skepticism 

The moral skepticism approach postulates that no person has moral wisdom. It is believed that moral knowledge is impossible. Moral skepticism can be understood in three subgroups, which are noncognitivism, moral error theory, and epistemological, moral. All the three subclasses of moral skepticism have the same conclusions. The first one is that there is no information which shows that no claim to moral validity. The second conclusion is that people are never acceptable in ascertaining the moral claims are valid. According to ethical error theory, the moral claim is not valid because all applications are false, and there is no justice to show where moral claims to true (Isserow, 2018). Moral skepticism suggests that the idea of morality should be abandoned, and there is no reason to obey any establish moral rules because they are not valid. 

I am not a moral skeptic individual. I believe that morality is essential to guide how people relate to each other. Ethical rules are necessary as they guide behavior, making people learn about what is right and get punished for the wrong actions. If morality were to be abandoned as suggested by moral skeptics, the world would be in chaos. Most people are selfish, and they would not care about others, and those who are weak would get hurt most. Moral rules, however, establish consequences to evilness and wrongdoing, punishment is created, and that ensures that the world is in order. I am not skeptical because I believe in the importance of right and wrong. It feels good when everyone is at peace with each other and not making others suffer because they cannot retaliate.    

Divine Command Theory 

The theory indicates that morally right actions are equivalent to being commanded by God. What is morally right is determined by God’s command, and an individual has to follow it to be moral. The theory had been applied mostly by the monotheistic and polytheistic regions, which accept God as the determinant of morality. The argument has included various figures such as   Søren Kierkegaard ,  Duns Scotus ,  Saint Augustine , and  William of Ockham  in describing the versions of the approach. The biblical characters have been used as an example to show the actions they did and were considered right and those which were wrong. Christians, for instance, are expected to follow the example of Christ, who lived a holy life to please God and be at peace with others (Harrison, 2018). There are also prophetic figures in other religions such as Muhammed in Islam who is an example of what should be right or wrong actions. 

The demand command theory is not plausible. The religious beliefs and teaching are supposed to be a foundation on what is right or wrong. However, people are created to be selfish and competitive, which means they cannot be as righteous as God. As an individual compete, they will always offend and hurt others. Competition is fair, but God is not competitive, which cannot be compared to human nature, where people want to be better than others. However, religion ensures that there are rules which guide fairness. In business, for instance, there are Bible verses that warn employers against making their employees suffer and unfair compensation. Religion has thus helped create business ethics, and those individuals who do right are considered moral business people. People cannot be like God because it is impossible, but following religious teachings helps promote morality in society.     

References 

Harrison, G. K. (2018). Divine Command Theory and Horrendous Deeds: a Reply to Wielenberg.  Sophia ,  57 (1), 173-187. 

Isserow, J. (2018). Evolutionary Hypotheses and Moral Skepticism.  Erkenntnis , 1-21. 

Kagan, S. (2018).  Normative ethics . Routledge.   

Peterson, V. V. (2017). Plato’s Allegory of the Cave: literacy and “the good.”  Review of Communication ,  17 (4), 273-287.