Why the Horrendous Deeds Objection Is Still a Bad Argument

Sophia 61 (2):399-418 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX


A common objection to divine command meta-ethics is the horrendous deeds objection. Critics object that if DCM is true, anything at all could be right, no matter how abhorrent or horrendous. Defenders of DCM have responded by contending that God is essentially good: God has certain character traits essentially, such as being loving and just. A person with these character traits cannot command just anything. In recent discussions of DCM, this ‘essential goodness response’ has come under fire. Critics of DCM have offered various objections to the essential goodness response. This paper responds to these critics. I examine and refute six such objections: the objection from counterpossibles, the objection from omnipotence, the objection from requirements of justice, the objection from God’s moral grounding power, the objection from evil and indifferent deities, and the epistemological objection. I will maintain that despite all that has been said about the horrendous deeds objection in recent analytic philosophy, the horrendous deeds argument is still a bad argument.



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 76,297

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Kant’s Neglected Objection to the Ontological Argument.Michael R. Slater - 2014 - European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 6 (2):179--184.
A Defense of Conscientious Objection in Health Care.Christopher Kaczor - 2018 - Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 92:41-58.
Two Marxist Objections to Exploitation.Paul Warren - 1998 - The Paideia Archive: Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy 42:181-186.
Problems with autonomy.Beate Rössler - 2002 - Hypatia 17 (4):143-162.


Added to PP

37 (#317,702)

6 months
8 (#105,345)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

The Elements of Moral Philosophy.James Rachels & Stuart Rachels - 2009 - New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Humanities/Social Sciences/Languages.
The Language of Morals.Richard Mervyn Hare - 1952 - Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong.Fred Feldman & J. L. Mackie - 1979 - Philosophical Review 88 (1):134.

View all 31 references / Add more references