Skip to main content
WalesReligious StudiesSyllabus dot point

What are the foundations of ethical thought, and how do divine command theory, virtue theory and egoism ground morality?

Ethical thought: divine command theory (and the Euthyphro dilemma), virtue theory (Aristotle), and ethical egoism, with their strengths and weaknesses.

A WJEC A-Level Religious Studies study of foundational ethical thought: divine command theory and the Euthyphro dilemma, Aristotelian virtue theory (the golden mean, eudaimonia), and ethical egoism, with the strengths and weaknesses of each approach.

Generated by Claude Opus 4.814 min answer

Reviewed by: AI editorial process; not yet individually human-reviewed

Have a quick question? Jump to the Q&A page

Jump to a section
  1. What this dot point is asking
  2. The answer
  3. Examples in context
  4. Try this

What this dot point is asking

This WJEC theme introduces the foundations of ethical thought through three contrasting approaches: divine command theory (and the Euthyphro dilemma), virtue theory (Aristotle), and ethical egoism. You need to explain each, with its strengths and weaknesses. The theme underpins the normative theories studied later (Natural Law, Situation Ethics, Kant, utilitarianism). AO1 wants accurate exposition; AO2 wants evaluation of how well each grounds morality.

The answer

Divine command theory

It has clear appeal for the religious believer: it gives morality an objective, authoritative foundation and explains why moral obligations are binding. Its great difficulty is the Euthyphro dilemma (from Plato): is an action good because God commands it, or does God command it because it is good? If the former, goodness seems arbitrary (God could command cruelty and it would be good); if the latter, goodness is independent of God, who merely recognises it, so he is not its source. Defenders offer a "third way": God's commands flow from his unchanging good nature, so they are neither arbitrary nor external to him.

Virtue theory

We become virtuous by habit: practising virtuous actions until good character is second nature. Each moral virtue is a golden mean between two vices, an excess and a deficiency (courage is the mean between recklessness and cowardice; generosity between extravagance and meanness). Aristotle also prized the intellectual virtue of practical wisdom (phronesis), which judges the right action in particular circumstances. The strength of virtue theory is its realistic focus on moral development and the whole person; its weakness is that it does not give clear guidance on what to do in a specific dilemma.

Ethical egoism

Egoism can be defended as psychologically realistic and as the basis of a rational, productive society (each pursuing their own good can benefit all). But it faces strong objections: it seems to license harming others when convenient, it conflicts with ordinary moral convictions about altruism and justice, and it may be self-defeating, since a society of pure egoists would struggle to cooperate or trust one another.

Examples in context

Model paragraph (does the Euthyphro dilemma destroy divine command theory?). The force of the Euthyphro dilemma is that it appears to leave the believer with two unattractive options, and a strong evaluation tests whether the standard reply genuinely escapes both. On the first horn, if an act is good simply because God commands it, then morality is arbitrary: had God commanded torture, torture would be good, which most believers find intolerable and which seems to empty "God is good" of content. On the second horn, if God commands an act because it is already good, then goodness is a standard independent of God, and divine command theory is false as an account of the source of morality. The usual defence grounds God's commands in his necessarily good nature, so that God neither invents goodness arbitrarily nor answers to an external standard, because the standard just is his own character. This reply has real strength, but it concedes something important: morality is now grounded in God's nature rather than his bare will, which is a modification of the original theory. A strong answer therefore judges that the dilemma does not destroy a nature-based version while showing that it does refute the crude "right because commanded" form.

Try this

Q1. State the Euthyphro dilemma. [2 marks]

  • Cue. Is an act good because God commands it (then goodness is arbitrary), or does God command it because it is good (then goodness is independent of God)?

Q2. What does Aristotle mean by the "golden mean"? [2 marks]

  • Cue. A virtue is the mean between two vices, an excess and a deficiency (courage between recklessness and cowardice).

Q3. Evaluate the view that morality must be grounded in God's commands. [20 marks]

  • What the marker wants. A balanced argument weighing the authority of divine command theory against the Euthyphro dilemma and rival foundations (virtue, egoism), with a reasoned judgement.

Exam-style practice questions

Practice questions written in the style of WJEC exam questions on this dot point, with worked answer explainers. The year tag is the paper they imitate, not the source.

WJEC sample20 marksExamine divine command theory and virtue theory as approaches to ethics.
Show worked answer →

An AO1 question rewarding accurate knowledge of two contrasting approaches.

Divine command theory: an action is right because God commands it and wrong because God forbids it; morality depends on God's will (associated with the Bible, and with thinkers such as the voluntarist tradition). Note the Euthyphro dilemma it must answer.

Virtue theory (Aristotle): morality is about character, not rules; we become good by developing virtues (courage, temperance, justice) as habits, each a "golden mean" between excess and deficiency, aiming at "eudaimonia" (flourishing).

Show the contrast: divine command is an ethics of obedience to commands; virtue theory is an ethics of character and habit.

Use the technical terms (voluntarism, Euthyphro, golden mean, eudaimonia) accurately.

WJEC sample20 marks"The Euthyphro dilemma fatally undermines divine command theory." Evaluate this view."
Show worked answer →

An AO2 question testing a balanced argument and a supported judgement.

The dilemma: is an act good because God commands it (then goodness is arbitrary, and God could command cruelty), or does God command it because it is good (then goodness is independent of God, and God is not its source)?

For: both horns damage the theory, making morality either arbitrary or independent of God.

Against: defenders reply that God's commands flow from his unchanging good nature (a "third way"), so they are neither arbitrary nor external; the dilemma is a false one.

A judgement might hold that the nature-based reply blunts the dilemma but at the cost of conceding that goodness is grounded in God's character rather than his bare will.

Top answers weigh the dilemma against the nature reply and conclude with reasons.

Related dot points

Sources & how we know this