SHAMELLE B. TOBIAS BSN 2-1 Activity #3 ETHICS EUTHYPHRO DILEMMA The world we live in is filled with crime, evil, and injustice, but do people have the desire to do bad things knowing that they are bad, or do they do them thinking that they are good? One way to phrase such Dilemma would be: "Is what is morally good commanded by God because it is morally good, or is it morally good because it is commanded by God?”. But the way around the dilemma to me is that God neither pronounces morality as He wishes, nor is He subject to a morality imposed on him by an even more fundamental reality. Instead, what we call morality is a reflection of God, and is derived from His nature. After reading numerous papers and articles about this matter, I think why many theists have rejected this dilemma and called it a “false dilemma” is that because they think there is actually a third viable option — that God is an inherently perfect and moral being and therefore “God neither conforms to nor invents the moral order. Rather His very nature is the standard for value. Which is to say that objective morality exists and it comes from God because God is the source of all goodness. I think we, people do things that are morally right and is based on what God wants us to do when our situation doesn’t make it hard for us to take the right or the good path but when we are subjected to heat of the moment where it becomes hard for us to choose to do what is right, we do things that are not morally right regardless of the fact the we know that it is wrong not just to the Lord’s eyes and commands but also in our eyes, in our personal perspective. That is why we cannot blame God for our wrong doings because I think God only serves as our guide and it depends on ourselves if we want to do the right or wrong thing. SHAMELLE B. TOBIAS BSN 2-1 ETHICS Consider this question, for instance: Are works of art in museums because they are works of art, or do we call them "works of art" because they are in museums? My personal take on this question is that, works of arts are placed in museum because they are works of art and not only because they are placed in a so called museum because anywhere can be a museum even if it’s just a small room or even if it’s out there in god knows where. What I’m trying to point is, God gave us the ability to think for ourselves and what we want to do in this very short life is up to us. One would say that, what will happen if we do wrong? Indeed there will be consequences, just like the saying an eye for an eye, maybe it’s easy for you to say that making them pay for what they’ve done is morally wrong but try to put yourselves in the shoes of those you have wronged, what if someone killed your loved one who didn’t caused others harm and is just trying to get through hardships everyday? Maybe now you’re thinking that what I’m trying to imply is wrong because it is not according to what God would want us to do, this is the point I’m trying to say all this time, that people do something based on what we seem to be just and fair, here comes the part where we are in the heat of the moment and chooses to do something against God’s commands based on our own perspective of what is right and wrong. That is why we have the Bible to lean on, even if we don’t see God right in front of our eyes, we can still access His words and teachings to guide us in such situations, not forcing us. Basically, what the dilemma is trying to point out is that either there are objective morals or there is a God, but there can’t be both. And I as a Christian will definitely reject this dilemma and call it a “false dilemma” because I think there is actually a third viable option — that God is an inherently perfect and moral being and therefore “God neither conforms to nor invents the moral order. Rather His very nature is the standard for value. Which is to say that objective morality exists and it comes from God because God is the source of all goodness. And the funny thing is, even though the negative polarity is a longer and harsher experience, it reaches the same conclusion found in the positive one: the fundamental Unity. There is final coalescence of entities and recognition of the illusion of separation and individualities.
