Final answer:
Philosophical ethics frameworks can align with the concept of a literal, eternal Hell when grounded in divine authority, but philosophies like ethical naturalism or process theology provide different understandings that might challenge this concept. The Euthyphro dilemma and metaphysical theory of free will further complicate the relationship between ethics and the divine.
Step-by-step explanation:
Philosophical ethics frameworks can both align with and conflict with the concept of a literal, eternal Hell as seen in Abrahamic religions and Dharmic traditions. Ethical frameworks based on divine authority suggest that ethics derive from God and therefore encompass beliefs in eternal consequences like Hell for moral failures. On the other hand, philosophical approaches like ethical naturalism or process theology may imply that moral truths can be understood by reasoning or through nature, challenging the notion of Hell as an eternal punishment decided by a divine authority.
Furthermore, the Euthyphro dilemma questions if actions are good because God commands them, or if God commands them because they are inherently good, highlighting potential conflicts between divine command theory and independent moral reasoning. Different philosophies, such as those by Thomas Aquinas, consider laws like eternal and natural laws, which provide a varied understanding of morality's relationship to divinity and could accommodate a belief in Hell. Moreover, the metaphysical theory of human freedom and free will also influences ethical thinking, with some arguing humans cannot be fully responsible for their behavior if they couldn't have acted differently. This stands in contrast to the moral absolutism suggested by an eternal Hell.