I have solved Euthyphro’s Dilemma

We all know chimps are better thinkers than man, especially in matters of religion and philosophy

And it took me all of ten seconds of reflection time while waiting at the welfare office the other day. (Long story.)

For the uninitiated: the Euthyphro Dilemma stems from Plato’s dialogue Euthyphro where the Greek philosopher poses a challenge to Euthyphro, a man claiming to be an expert on religion.

“Is the morally good commanded by God because it is morally good, or is it morally good because it is commanded by God?”

Ie.: does God order something because it is righteous, or is righteous because it is ordered by God? (Seriously, you could come up with about a hundred different variations.)

Anyway. Euthyphro has puzzled philosophers, theists and theologians for millennia and still sparks debate today. Which, frankly, I can’t help but feel rather amused and derisive about, considering how transparently obvious it is.

So, what’s the answer to this famous Dilemma, you ask? It is in two parts.

The first (and most obvious) part is, as my father put it so well when I quizzed him about it … who gives a shit? To any non-theist, there is hardly any point or interest in debating the morality or nature of a deity we don’t believe even exists. You might as well ask us to debate the length of Tooth Fairy’s wand, or Santa Clause’s weight. (I still wonder how Mrs. Clause stays with him all year long cooped up in the North Pole.) However, some actually do like a little intellectual debate now and then on the matter, which is why I’m bringing it up, here.

Secondly (and perhaps more relevantly): the answer is that, quite simply, whatever God commands is morally righteous (good). It’s the only answer that fits most concepts about the sky-daddy: his supposed omniscience (all-knowing)^[1], omnipotence (all-powerful)^[2] and omnibenevolence (all-loving)^[3]. Sure, some dispute these characteristics, but they are the ones most prevalent within the writings of the Bible, so there. If Christians can’t even settle on what their God is like when they all have the exact same Holy Scriptures to learn from, then that really does speak loads about their credibility, doesn’t it? But, I digress.

Now, of course, morality is a human construct. But, theists don’t like real-life explanations, favoring the one where all morality comes from God and without it, we’re all just latent criminals just waiting to go out and rape a goat. So, for the purpose of this dialogue, we assume that morality does come from the Supreme Being. In that case, considering how God is (supposedly) all-this and all-that, and that he is also the Creator of the Heavens and the Earth (which is, of course, Bible-speak for “the whole Universe and absolutely everything in it”), then it’s quite readily implied that if morality comes from him, then he’s the one who decides what’s right and what’s wrong – ie. what’s morally good (righteous) and not.

I trust you see where this is going? The conclusion couldn’t be more evident. What God commands is morally good, because God is, himself, benevolent (and therefore, morally good). It would be rather uncharacteristic of an omnibenevolent entity (which, remember, doesn’t just mean loving, but all-loving – depending on which part of the Bible you read, anyway) to do anything less than what’s morally good, wouldn’t it?

So: by virtue of God being all-good and all-powerful, and by virtue of God being the Supreme Ruler and Creator of all things, including the concept known as “morality”, then it’s the purely logical conclusion (and the only logical one) that “good” is whatever God says it is. Q.E.D.

(Amazing how something I thought up in about 10 seconds could be stretched to fill up a whole post. Shows what sort of a “tricky” dilemma this was, doesn’t it?)

^[1] The case for God’s omniscience.

^[2] The case for God’s omnipotence.

^[3] The case for God’s love, righteousness, and mercy (which all fit under “benevolence”).