Metaethics: Ethics And Ethics

1502 Words4 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Individual relativism vs cultural relativism

The study of Metaethics has always been the favorite topic of philosophers since the beginning of written philosophy. To this day, many renowned philosophers like Plato and Socrates were faced with the task of understanding what moral concepts are, and where they originate from. One of the oldest philosophical dilemmas is the Euthyphro dilemma which asks the questions “Do the gods love one thing because it is good or it is good because the gods love it” This type of dilemma continues to be subject of many ethical discussions. The study of Metaethics shed light on why people should believe moral truth, and if they do how do they interpret moral truth in their life. Furthermore, Metaethics deals with a “systematic and theoretical understanding of moral terminology, discourse, …show more content…

According to his theory, his morality is right. If we do not have a reference point for good, then it means we can’t compare and contrast our moral facts. An individual person’s reference point cannot be used as a source objective moral fact, because it is not going to work for the greater number of people. In this case, individual relativism claims about the source of objective moral fact it 's not true.
Others like a cultural relativist claim society determines moral facts. Relativism indicates that moral facts differ from one culture to another. Some societies might consider harmful practices such as slavery and female circumcision are permissible under certain conditions. For a cultural relativist society, there is no objective moral standards separate form what the culture approves. There is no moral truth that is true for all people. For this reason, we cannot claim that some moral values of a society are objectively right or wrong. It would make sense to judge interims of a specific

Show More
Related

  • Cultural Relativism: An Impediment to Critical Morality

    1079 Words  | 3 Pages

    Cultural Relativism is a moral theory which states that due to the vastly differing cultural norms held by people across the globe, morality cannot be judged objectively, and must instead be judged subjectively through the lense of an individuals own cultural norms. Because it is obvious that there are many different beliefs that are held by people around the world, cultural relativism can easily be seen as answer to the question of how to accurately and fairly judge the cultural morality of others, by not doing so at all. However Cultural Relativism is a lazy way to avoid the difficult task of evaluating one’s own values and weighing them against the values of other cultures. Many Cultural Relativist might abstain from making moral judgments about other cultures based on an assumed lack of understanding of other cultures, but I would argue that they do no favors to the cultures of others by assuming them to be so firmly ‘other’ that they would be unable to comprehend their moral decisions. Cultural Relativism as a moral theory fails to allow for critical thoughts on the nature of morality and encourages the stagnation

    Read More

  • A Discussion to Compare Moral Theories

    707 Words  | 2 Pages

    A discussion of moral theories must begin with a discussion of the two extremes of ethical thinking, absolutism and relativism. Moral Absolutism is the belief that there are absolute standards where moral questions are judged and can be deemed right or wrong, regardless of the context. Steadfast laws of the universe, God, nature itself are the forces that deem an action right or wrong. A person’s actions rather than morals and motivations are important in an Absolutism proposition. Moral Relativism states, that the moral propositions are based on Ethical relativism is the theory that holds that morality is relative to the norms of one's culture. That is, whether an action is right or wrong depends on the moral norms of the society in which it is practiced. The same action may be morally right in one society but be morally wrong in another. For the ethical relativist, there are no universal moral standards that apply to all peoples at all times. Ethical relativism is the theory that holds that morality is relative to the norms of one's culture. That is, whether an action is right or wrong depends on the moral norms of the society in which it is practiced. The same action may be morally right in one society but be morally wrong in another. For the ethical relativist, there are no universal moral standards -- standards that can be applied to all peoples at all times. Culture and personal morals cause a person to make certain moral decisions.

    Read More

  • Constructivism In Ethics And Metaethics

    602 Words  | 2 Pages

    In “What is Constructivism in Ethics and Metaethics” Sharon Street claims every individual has the ability to decide what is valuable to them and what is not valuable. She also claims that a single desire can be irrational and at the same time can not be intrinsically irrational. I will argue against this in my paper. In Section 1 I will explain Street’s point of view, and in Section 2 I will object her view.

    Read More

  • Analysis Of Moral Relativism

    1083 Words  | 3 Pages

    Moral relativism maintains that objective moral truth does not exist, and there need not be any contradiction in saying a single action is both moral and immoral depending on the relative vantage point of the judge. Moral relativism, by denying the existence of any absolute moral truths, both allows for differing moral opinions to exist and withholds assent to any moral position even if universally or nearly universally shared. Strictly speaking, moral relativism and only evaluates an action’s moral worth in the context of a particular group or perspective. The basic logical formulation for the moral relativist position states that different societies have empirically different moral codes that govern each respective society, and because there does not exist an objective moral standard of judgment, no society’s moral code possesses any special status or maintains any moral superiority over any other society’s moral code. The moral relativist concludes that cultures cannot evaluate or criticize other cultural perspectives in the absence of any objective standard of morality, essentially leveling all moral systems and limiting their scope to within a given society.

    Read More

  • Moral Morality

    1847 Words  | 4 Pages

    Morality is defined as “neither mysterious nor irrational but furnishes the necessary guidelines for how we can promote human welfare and prevent suffering” (Fisher 134). Moral relativism suggests that when it comes to questions about morality, there is no absolute right and wrong. Relativists argue that there can be situations in which certain behavior that would generally be considered “wrong” can also be considered “right”. The most prominent argument for moral relativism was posed by a foremost American anthropologist, Ruth Benedict, who claimed that absolute morality does not exist because cultures and individuals disagree on moral issues and because of these differences, morality cannot be objective (Benedict). For example, in the United

    Read More

  • Differences Of Cultural Relativism: Personality, And Morality

    1104 Words  | 3 Pages

    Relativism is the belief that there is no absolute truth, that the only truth is what an individual or culture happen to believe. People who believe in relativism often think different people can have different views about what's moral and immoral. Cultural relativism, like moral relativism, filter through today's society. People often believe that as long no one gets hurt, everything will be okay. Realistically, the truth about relativism has been discarded along with God.

    Read More

  • Bioethics

    1906 Words  | 4 Pages

    The case of Dr. Lowell and Mrs. Jackson revolves around a conflict between the doctor, who advocates the implementation of a particular treatment and the patient who disagrees with the doctor and wishes to do things her own way. The doctor feels that the suggested course of action is disastrous and threatens to have the patient declared mentally incompetent. The question now is whether or not the doctor is morally justified in taking action against the patient in order to implement the course of treatment she feels would be most effective. Is this an infringement on the autonomy of the patient or is the doctor morally obliged to do everything that he/she can possible do in order to restore the patient’s health even if that includes to go so far as to take this decision out of the hands of the patient?

    Read More

  • Social Contract Theory and Cultural Relativism

    2200 Words  | 5 Pages

    Cultural relativism theorizes that the best way for different societies to function together at peace is for them to recognize that each culture must be allowed its own system of beliefs. One individual may believe that his or her culture’s belief system is the one true way. Is there any way to absolutely prove that that person’s morals are not correct? Not in the cultural relativist view. Cultural relativism states that no man from a different background can justifiably say that another society’s beliefs are wrong; that other society may believe that his ideas are wrong. The only way to resolve the matter peaceably, as cultural relativism acknowledges, is for societies to recognize their differences without attempting to force their beliefs upon one another; neither will they try to prove each other wrong. They must simply peacefully coexist without interference generated by belief systems.

    Read More

  • Essay On The Challenges Of Cultural Relativism

    1459 Words  | 3 Pages

    The practices of many cultures are varied from one another, considering we live in a diverse environment. For example, some cultures may be viewed as similar in comparison while others may have significant differences. The concept of Cultural Relativism can be best viewed as our ideas, morals, and decisions being dependent on the individual itself and how we have been culturally influenced. This leads to many conflict in where it prompts us to believe there is no objectivity when it comes to morality. Some questions pertaining to Cultural Relativism may consists of, “Are there universal truths of morality?” “Can we judge

    Read More

  • The Challenge Of Cultural Relativism By James Rachels

    1031 Words  | 3 Pages

    However, cultural relativism is not the most satisfactory moral theory. ‘“Cultural relativism implies that another common place of moral life illusion moral disagreement, and such inconsistencies hint that there may be something amiss with relativism. It seems it conflicts violently with common sense realities of the moral life. The doctrine implies that each person is morally infallible”’ (Vaughn 14).

    Read More

  • Ethics And Ethical Systems

    1378 Words  | 3 Pages

    As a function, ethics is a philosophical study of the moral value of human conduct, and of the rules and principles it should govern. As a system, ethics are a social, religious, or civil code of behavior considered correct by a particular group, profession, or individual. As an instrument, ethics provide perspective regarding the moral fitness of a decision, course of action, or potential outcomes. Ethical decision-making can include many types, including deontological (duty), consequentialism (including utilitarianism), and virtue ethics. Additionally, subsets of relativism, objectivism, and pluralism seek to understand the impact of moral diversity on a human level. Although distinct differences separate these ethical systems, organizations

    Read More

  • Ethics and Morality: Right and Wrong

    993 Words  | 2 Pages

    I strongly believe that some acts are morally right and others morally wrong. Though in society today I find many different people with many different opinions on this some issues. The way someone was raised or the experiences they have faced could be what has molded these beliefs. The differences between right and wrong are not always the same in each person's head and this is where we face controversy. Morals differ from person to person resulting in confrontations dealing with morality issues. Such as euthanasia, human beings should not have to suffer, just as we do not allow animals to suffer. I believe Pro-Choice is morally right. Woman should be given the choice of whether or not she can terminate her pregnancy. On the flip side, I feel cheating is morally wrong, and puts people at an unfair advantage.

    Read More

  • The Pros And Cons Of Cultural Relativism

    1155 Words  | 3 Pages

    There are different countries and cultures in the world, and as being claimed by cultural relativists, there is no such thing as “objective truth in morality” (Rachels, 2012). Cultural relativists are the people who believe in the Cultural Ethical Relativism, which declares that different cultures value different thing so common ethical truth does not exist. However, philosopher James Rachels argues against this theory due to its lack of invalidity and soundness. He introduced his Geographical Differences Argument to point out several mistakes in the CER theory. Cultural Ethical Relativism is not totally wrong because it guarantees people not to judge others’ cultures; but, Rachels’ viewpoints make a stronger argument that this theory should not be taken so far even though he does not reject it eventually.

    Read More

  • Ethics And Ethics: The Approaches Of Ethics

    816 Words  | 2 Pages

    Ethics is the branch of philosophy that involves systematizing, defending, and recommending concepts of right and wrong conduct. The term ethics derives from the Ancient Greek word ἠθικός ethikos, which is derived from the word ἦθος ethos . The branch of philosophy axiology comprises the sub-branches of Ethics and aesthetics, each concerned with concepts of value.

    Read More

  • What Determines Right & Wrong?

    928 Words  | 2 Pages

    Ethical relativism is the theory on the moral norms practiced within the society to determine whether an action is right or wrong. In other words, a society’s practices judge its own moral standards. In ethical relativism, anthropologist believed there are no standards that apply across the universe for all people at all times. Objectively, nothing is right or wrong. In determining the definition of right and wrong, it depends on a particular culture, or historical period prevailing view. The majority rule determines the terms of right and wrong.

    Read More

More about Metaethics: Ethics And Ethics

Open Document