Exactly how Divine Command theory commits Naturalistic fallacy?
I'm not a philosophy student. So,Please explain in plain english with simple examples. Also:
1. Can divine command theory logically avoid or ignore naturalistic fallacy?
2. Can divine command theory logically solve/avoid/ignore/disagree with hume's is-ought problem in any way?
No wikipedia please!
- ?Lv 71 decade agoFavorite Answer
The supposed "Naturalistic fallacy" is not actually one of the classic logical fallacies, it's something invented by British Philosopher George Edward Moore in his 1903 work "Principia Ethica", and basically states that morality cannot be defined based on principles of nature. "Divine Command Theory" is actually a misnomer, the theory postulates that morality is a matter of conforming to what God wills rather than to what any particular religion says God commands.
1. Since DCT postulates morality to be based on divine will and not to an appeal to natural law DCT is in no way committing the Naturalistic fallacy, the natural order would be irrelevant.
2. For the same reason it would also ignore the is-ought problem since what we think ought to be would be irrelevant next to the need to conform to divine will.