The divine command theory sates that all human actions must be evaluated as moral or immoral in accordance with orders of God. What God permits is considered to be good, and vice versa what is prohibited by God is evil. According to this theory morality and moral obligations depend upon God (Austin par.2).
At the same time, it must be admitted that due to its contrariety this theory has been criticized a lot by many prominent philosophers.
Apart from philosophical problems of Gods existence caused by the contradictions of this theory, it is difficult to apply it to a definite moral dilemma. There are many religions and it is not clear what religious belief must be chosen for a solution of any given situation. Moreover, there may be found a lot of examples of Gods orders in Bible as well as in Quran that contradict to the generally accepted moral principles.
However, from the point of view of this theory the actions of Robin Hood may be considered as evil. From the biblical Ten Commandments it is known that God says: “thou shalt not steal” (Mt: 19:18). By stealing from the rich, Robin Hood violates this commandment and his deeds are immoral. All the others moral aspects are not taken into consideration within this theory.
The main idea of the philosophy of utilitarianism is that a morality of an action depends on effects caused by it. The originators of this theory are Jeremy Bentham, who is the representative of the classic approach, and John Stuart Mill. Bentham believes that a person in his actions should be ruled by an idea of a total happiness.
In their definition of morality, the utilitarians assert that a right action should produce “the greatest happiness for the greatest number” (Moore and Bruder 284). Moreover, the general happiness is more important than the happiness of an individual. It must be added that in the theory of the utilitarianism there were two philosophical directions such as act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism.
The evaluation of Robin Hoods actions form the point of view of this theory may be interpreted in two ways. On the one hand, it is possible to say that by stealing from the wealthy people and gifting the needy persons Robin Hood makes the poor happy. It is the universal truth that in the days of Robin Hood the poor people have been more numerous in comparison with the rich. So Robin Hoods actions are good. But it is the approach of the act utilitarianism. Despite the common idea, the rule utilitarianism pays more attention to the evaluation of the action relatively the effect of the rule of this action to the general happiness. Considering this, it is possible to say that if a theft is accepted as a general norm of behavior the general happiness will be reduced. So, the actions of Robin Hood are evil.
There may be distinguished two types of egoism philosophy. They are the descriptive and prescriptive egoism (“The Elements of Moral Philosophy” par.14).
According to the first doctrine, a self-profit is made from all actions. That is the mere statement of the fact that a person in all his actions is ruled by a purpose of a self-profit. The second type, which is the prescriptive egoism states that a person ought to seek a self-profit in every action.
Taking into consideration this theory, it is possible to say that the actions of Robin Hood are evil. He does not get any benefit for himself.
Works Cited
Austin, Michael. Divine Command Theory. n.d.
Moore, Brook, and Kenneth Bruder. Philosophy. New York:McGrow-Hill, 2008. Print
The Elements of Moral Philosophy 2015. Web.