Abstract :
One of the most important recent developments in the discussion ofKierkegaard’s ethics is an interpretation defended, in different forms, by PhilipQuinn and Stephen Evans. Both argue that a divine-command theory of moralobligation (DCT) is to be found in Works of Love. Against this view, I argue that,despite significant overlap between DCT and the view of moral obligation found inWorks of Love, there is at least one essential difference between the two: the former,but not the latter, is committed to the claim that, necessarily, p is morally obligatoryonly if God commands that p
