ICOG

Question 1

Explain the Euthyphro dilemma

Answer 1

A) Actions are morally right independent of gods commands(that’s why god commands them)
-Option A causes problems for God’s omnibenevolence as God isn’t the source of morality
-Option A causes problems for God’s omnipotence as if it is independent of God, then God didn’t create it and can’t change it
B)Actions are morally right only because God commands them
-Option B causes problems for God’s omnibenevolence as God cannot give moral justification for particular actions being right or wrong. This makes option B arbitrary

Therefore there is no acceptable way of understanding an omnibenevolent God’s relationship to moral goodness

Therefore God cannot be omnibenevolent

Question 2

Euthyphro 25 marker

Answer 2

First point:
Descartes understood God’s omnipotence to be ‘God can do all tasks, including logically impossible tasks’. Because God created everything, it can be understood that he created the laws of logic, and so God is not limited by these laws, so God can make and move an immovable stone. Therefore P1 is false.
However , these impossible “tasks” shouldn’t be considered tasks at all because tasks are something that can be done, not something that is impossible. Therefore God cannot do the logically impossible, because it is not a task. Therefore P1 remains true.

Second point
Swinburne argues that an omnipotent god can make the stone, but chooses not to. As long as God does not make the stone, then there is no stone he cannot lift, and no tasks God cannot do. This disagrees with P2 as we can agree that God can make the stone, but disagrees that there is a task God cannot do. Therefore, the Paradox. fails.
However, if God could choose to stop being omnipotent, then he is not necessarily omnipotent. This makes God contingently omnipotent, which contradicts the very idea of God.