God's Command

John Hare's "God's Command" presents a systematic defense of divine command theory, addressing contemporary philosophical objections while demonstrating its coherence and relevance for moral philosophy. The work engages critically with secular moral theories and offers a sophisticated account of how divine commands ground moral obligations without falling prey to traditional criticisms.

Hare structures his argument through careful engagement with historical and contemporary sources, drawing particularly on Duns Scotus while responding to critics from Plato to contemporary philosophers. He addresses the Euthyphro dilemma directly, arguing that divine commands neither make morality arbitrary nor render God subject to external moral standards. Instead, Hare develops a nuanced position where God's essential goodness and divine commands work together to establish moral obligations. This approach allows him to maintain that moral properties depend on God while avoiding the charge that morality becomes mere divine whim.

The work makes several distinctive contributions to divine command theory. Hare argues that divine commands provide the best explanation for the prescriptive force of morality, addressing what he sees as a fundamental gap in naturalistic ethics. He contends that secular moral theories struggle to account for moral obligation's categorical nature, whereas divine command theory naturally explains why moral requirements bind us unconditionally. Hare also develops an account of how human beings can know divine commands through reason, scripture, and tradition, addressing epistemological concerns about divine command theory's practical applicability.

Particularly significant is Hare's engagement with evolutionary ethics and moral naturalism. He argues that while evolution might explain moral sentiments, it cannot ground genuine moral obligations. This critique extends to various forms of moral realism that attempt to locate moral facts in natural properties. Hare maintains that only a transcendent source can provide the authority necessary for moral obligations to bind rational agents categorically.

The monograph contributes to broader discussions about religion's role in public life and moral discourse. Hare defends the legitimacy of religious perspectives in moral philosophy while acknowledging the need for public accessibility in moral reasoning. His work demonstrates how divine command theory can engage constructively with secular philosophy without compromising its theological commitments. Through rigorous philosophical analysis, Hare revitalizes divine command theory for contemporary debates, showing how theistic ethics remains a viable option in moral philosophy.