Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
essays on ethical relativism
essays on ethical relativism
essays on ethical relativism
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: essays on ethical relativism
Argument from moral variability, as we discuss in our philosophy class, it is an argument to support Ethical Relativism, this argument claims that since different people have different moral standards, so there is no universal moral standard. As Stace claimed in his essay “ Ethical Relativism: A Critique”, “For the absolutist there is a single universal moral standard. For the relativist there is no such standard. There are only local, ephemeral, and variable standards.”(Stace, para 7). What Stace indicated in his argument is: people form different moral standards based on their backgrounds, circumstances, and ages, one thing treated right for this group may be treated wrong for the other group. From a personal perspective, I don’t agree with …show more content…
So we have laws to obey, have regulations to follow. As all the schools tell their students that cheating is seriously wrong, if students cheat in their exams, they will be punished severely, even being expelled, so all the students have to study hard in order to get good grades instead of cheating others’ answers or using their smart phones to search for the answers. This is one of the moral facts, and if it isn’t, nobody needs to read their textbooks and do their assignment, everyone can cheat in the exams, and the school has no reason to punish these people, because their own moral standard is “cheating is right, it is one tool to help me get good grades.”, and no one can judge their behavior to be false, since there is no a certain standard. As a matter of fact, many of our government’s laws are connected with moral standards, such as speed limit, no alcohol while driving, fraud and murder. These laws are based on the moral standards that harm other lives is wrong. If there is no speed limit, people can drive as quickly as they want on the highway, the city would be ruined with car accident. If there is no limit of pollution, our earth would be ruined by noxious
Utilitarianism is an example of Consequentialist Ethics, where the morality of an action is determined by its accomplishing its desired results. In both scenarios the desired result was to save the lives of thousands of people in the community. Therefore, a Utilitarian would say that the actions taken in both of the scenarios are moral. Since an (Act) Utilitarian believes that actions should be judged according to the results it achieves. Happiness should not be simply one's own, but that of the greatest number. In both scenarios, the end result saved the lives of 5,000 members of the community. The end result is the only concern and to what extreme is taken to reach this result is of no matter. In these instances the things that are lost are an Inmates religious beliefs or a mothers fetus, on the other hand Thousands of citizens were saved from dying from this disease.
If a teacher is unfamiliar with current advancements in the digital world, it is possible that they will miss the most obvious of cheaters. Because the student is never punished or caught, they assume the teacher does not consider it cheating. In some cases, schools are responsible for the rise in cheating because of the way curriculum is presented. In an article written by the Atlantic, a teacher received an anonymous letter from a successful college student stating that he had cheated all throughout high school. He told the author he cheated “because the grade [he]would have otherwise been given was not reflective of [his] true learning” (Lahey). In other words, he felt the teachers were giving him exams that were not accurate representations of the material he had learned. If students are giving themselves excuses for their cheating, that feeling of guilt will subside, and they will not view the action as wrong. Many think they are not at fault if they do not get caught or because they are just trying to keep up with their classmates who are cheating as well. These are the students that contribute to the statistics, the ones who are adding to
(DK80b1): “Of all things the measure is man, of the things that are, that [or "how"] they are, and of things that are not, that [or "how"] they are not.” Protagoras brand of ethical relativism suggested that morality is subjective to the relative context, such as culture, within a family, or even autonomous authority. In the Plato’s Theaetetus Socrates and Theaetetus have a discussion that centers primarily around the epistemology of Protagoras and Heraclitus that knowledge is only perceptions. Socrates puts forth his objections and alternatives. His alternatives likewise center around his theory of the forms and the objectivity of this theory. If knowledge is perceptions to Protagoras, then you can see how morality would be subjective. If I say it is wrong to eat a horse, and someone from Europe says that it is not wrong to eat a horse, then the wrongness of that statement is relative to the culture. Taken further, if one person perceives x as wrong and another person perceives x as right the truth value is relative to an autonomous authority. The distinction in this the ethical nihilism of Gorgias is that there is still belief that these statements have normative value that is truth value.
However, this may stem from a lack of enforcement of the rules. Even at the most prestigious schools, such as Harvard University, students are not upholding the rules implemented: “The possibility that 125 Harvard students ‘improperly collaborated’ on an exam in the spring has galvanized … discussion about … honor codes” (Source: C). In this case, people may argue that the only party at fault consists of the students. However, the faculty may be partially guilty as well, as their lack of care towards the rules has created a situation that jeopardizes the school’s integrity. Revision may then seem like the least of the school’s priorities, as they must show they seriously consider educational integrity. Likewise, at the University of Virginia, “157 students have been investigated by their peers in the largest cheating scandal in memory” (Source: D). Again, the school and all those who work there hold at least part of the fault for this ignorance because, theoretically, they should preserve and enforce the rules provided. The fact that the scandal exists means that they were not doing their jobs to their fullest. Although revision may seem simpler to carry out, the school’s staff must show an attempt at intervention within the student lives to keep them on a path towards
That is not always the case, if the students’ belief is set to always do the right thing it will be done without any hesitation. “Despite the detailed testimony of the student who reported the infraction, the accused student walked free. The student reporting the infraction was socially stigmatized but also didn’t regret taking action.”(Gabor, 1). This also proves that if honor codes are added it can work effectively. Many students want to do the right thing, but sometimes need a little help in the right direction. If cheating is not reported the integrity of the honor code gets damaged severely. If people cheat and they do not report the cheating, the cheater will start to believe that it is okay to cheat and it will become a habit that is not good to have as a
"Who's to judge who's right or wrong?" In the case against moral relativism Pojman provides an analysis of Relativism. His analysis includes an interpretation of Relativism that states the following ideas: Actions vary from society to society, individuals behavior depends on the society they belong to, and there are no standards of living that apply to all human kind. An example that demonstrates these ideas is people around the world eat beef (cows) and in India, cows are not to be eaten. From Pojman second analysis an example can be how the Japanese take of their shoes all the time before entering the house. In Mexico it is rare that people take off their shoes. They might find it wired or not normal. In his third analysis he gives that sense moral relativism and cultural relativism are tied together, that their can be no
Moral relativism is the concept that people’s moral judgement can only goes as far a one person’s standpoint in a matter. Also, one person’s view on a particular subject carries no extra weight than another person. What I hope to prove in my thesis statement are inner judgements, moral disagreements, and science are what defend and define moral relativism.
Gilbert Harman lays out his moral relativism theory with “inner judgments”, the statements concerned with “ought”, in Moral Relativism Defended. However, he assumes an important premise of his theory to be true, which is the reason that I will prove the missing premise – that moral relativism is true – in this paper. Moreover, his form of moral relativism with his “four-place predicate ‘Ought(A,D,C,M),’ which relates an agent A, a type of action D, considerations C, and motivating attitudes M,” has brought about both meta-ethical and practical concerns. He argues that these inner judgments are only possible if agent A acknowledges considerations of the circumstance C, invokes motivating attitudes M, and supports the action D with C and M. In
Moral relativists believe that no one has the right to judge another individuals choice, decisions, or lifestyle because however they choose to live is right for them. In addition everyone has the right to their own moral beliefs and to impose those beliefs on another individual is wrong. At first glance moral relativism may appear ideal in allowing for individual freedom. After all why shouldn’t each individual be entitled to their own idea of moral values and why should others force their beliefs on anyone else. “American philosopher and essayist, Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882), tells us, what is right is only what the individual thinks is right. There is no higher court of appeals, no higher, universal, or absolute moral standard.” (pg 121) Moral relativism means if does not feel wrong than it must be right.
A world that demands perfection is only more likely to create imperfections. In the article “Who’s Cheating Whom?” written by Alfie Kohn, he deconstructs cheating in school from why students cheat to the underlining cause. He sheds light on the fact that cheating could in fact be mainly caused by the environment our culture has created for students. Cheating is most often seen in situations where students find what they’re learning to be boring or something they have no interest in. Many social scientists also believe cheating is a result of both the educational system and society valuing and rewarding the high grades over actual learning and teaching. Due to this competitive environment created in school
Moral relativism, as Harman describes, denies “that there are universal basic moral demands, and says different people are subject to different basic moral demands depending on the social customs, practices, conventions, and principles that they accept” (Harman, p. 85). Many suppose that moral feelings derive from sympathy and concern for others, but Harman rather believes that morality derives from agreement among people of varying powers and resources provides a more plausible explanation (Harman, p. 12).The survival of these values and morals is based on Darwin’s natural selection survival of the fittest theory. Many philosophers have argued for and against what moral relativism would do for the world. In this essay, we will discuss exactly what moral relativism entails, the consequences of taking it seriously, and finally the benefits if the theory were implemented.
For Cultural Relativism, it is perfectly normal that something one culture sees as moral, another may see as immoral. There is no connection between them so they are never in conflict relative to their moral beliefs. However, within the context of Ethical Relativism there’s a significant difference. Normally, two cultures will possess varying proportions of the same normal and abnormal habits yet from a cross-cultural standpoint, what is abnormal in one culture can be seen as properly normal in an...
From a young age we are taught the differences between right and wrong, but as we get older the line between moral and immoral is often blurred. Things that were once thought of as unacceptable are now perfectly fine in our minds. Have you ever seen anyone cheat on an assignment or exam? Do you know anyone that’s been expelled from school for cheating? What if it was discovered that a U.S. senator plagiarized his college thesis paper? Imagine if it got out that one of the most respected universities in the U.S. was involved in a huge fraud scandal that involved thousands of students. Academic cheating is a terrible offense because it is unethical, self-degrading, and can be detrimental to the learning environment.
The world is a mixture of ethical relativism and moral objectivism, even though some commonalities of fundamental moral principles exist between certain societies, not every society subscribes to those moral principles. Ethical relativism is based on the premise that morality is relative to the norms of one 's culture. However, moral objectivism is the position that certain acts are universally right or wrong, independent of human opinion. A hybrid approach to these theological philosophies has helped me be successful in the military. As the military moves towards acceptance and understanding of the changing environment, leaders have to be prepared to react in an appropriate manner. The trick is to find the balance between the military values
Worldwide societies differ in what they believe to be right and wrong. Moral relativism is the idea that moral principles are relative to one culture or society and independent of others, according to this practice there is no universal moral standard. This moral belief is widely rejected and is seen as unfit in today’s worldwide society. One way which moral relativism can be useful in today’s society is when comparing our society to yesterday’s. The underlying idea of time is what most influences our relative beliefs of morality. This supports the thought that moral values are never absolute. As time progresses we are inclined to view the past with scrutiny and adjust moral compasses accordingly.