Ethical Relativism And Ethical Absolutism

1178 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Ethics and its importance

Writing Assignment #1

Who decides what is ethical and what is moral? There are no standards of conduct that everyone in the world agrees upon. There are different religions, cultures and ethnicities in this world and because of that; there will most likely never be a day where everyone finds everything that someone else does to be ethical or moral. Since there can never be a universal standard for morality and ethical behavior for people everywhere, we must stop judging people by looking through the lenses of our culture or society . We must judge a person and his actions by the standards of his culture or society. An action one person considers being justifiable behavior may not be the same case for another person. When cultures and religions …show more content…

While ethical relativism states that a person must respect another person’s culture and behaviors according to the behavior and customs that are considered moral pertaining to that society when the action happens in that society. Ethical absolutism declares that there are certain actions that everyone in any society should consider unethical. Regardless of the context of certain action or the society where it is happens, certain actions remain as equally immoral if the action occurs in America or if the action occurs in a small island in the Pacific Ocean according to ethical absolutism. Ethical absolutism is proclaiming that there is a universal ethical code which involves everyone regardless of the culture or society. Ethical relativism makes an attempt to understand the behaviors in other cultures or societies without judging the action by the standards of an incompatible society where the action does not happen. Ethical absolutism does not undertake the same strategy as ethical relativism, there is no room for understanding behaviors in other cultures because once it is seen as wrong then it will always be wrong no matter the explanation behind the

Show More
Related

  • Natural Law Theory and The Doctrine of Double Effect Theory: Thomas Aquinas

    590 Words  | 2 Pages

    The difference between absolutism and objectivism is that where objectivists believe that there are universal moral principles in which people of all ethical backgrounds and cultures have the validity to follow, absolutists believe that there are underlying values within these beliefs that strictly cannot ever be over-ridden, violated or broken under any circumstances (REF). Furthermore, while absolutists believe in this notion that moral principles are ‘exception-less’, objectivists strongly follow the notion that life is situational and that we as humans have to adapt accordingly to the variables that arise, take them into account, and then make a decision accordingly (REF). Within this introduction of variables applicable to any situation, it is therefore believed that each moral principle must be weighed against each other to produce the best possible outcome, and this is where the overriding of values occurs in an objectivists view, and where an absolutist would disregard these circumstances.

    Read More

  • The Case Against Moral Relativism

    278 Words  | 1 Pages

    "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

    Read More

  • Ethical Relativism By Louis Pojman

    1071 Words  | 3 Pages

    Many seem to have falling prey to the seduction of ethical relativism, because it plays in to their ethnocentric egoistic moral belief. Individuals such as Pojman are able to critically evaluate this moral principle and not fall victim like his or hers lay counter parts. We will attempt to analyze the theory of ethical relativism, by check the validity of this ethical theory, and evaluate its ethical concepts. With these procedures we will find if it is competent as an ethical principle to adhere by. Then evaluate Louis Pojman critique on ethical relativism and analyze does he successfully refute relativism position. We will also analyze objectivism; the ethical theory which Pojman erects in the place of ethical relativism.

    Read More

  • Famine, Affluence, and Morality

    1367 Words  | 3 Pages

    Webster's English Dictionary defines "morality" as: the conformity to ideals of right human conduct. With this in mind, I wonder who determines right human conduct? Religion aside, there is no literary context that strictly states the rights and wrongs of human behavior. So who decides? Who determines what we ought morally to do and what we are obligated to do as a society? An Australian philosopher, Peter Singer attempts to draw the line between obligation and charity with the moral incentives to providing food for the starved in East Bengal. Although he presents many sound arguments, the reality of his utopian world is that it cannot exist. In the following expository, I will justify my reasoning behind this fact.

    Read More

  • The Ethical System Refection

    1029 Words  | 3 Pages

    There are many ethical systems that were created over the years, each created to support curtain people’s beliefs, cultures, and ideologies. Out of all the systems that were presented in this course I believe that relativism and absolutism most aligns with my beliefs. Relativism is the fact that there is no absolute and that what is considered right and wrong varies from person to person and society to society. While absolutism “is the ethical belief that there are absolute standards against which moral questions can be judged and that certain actions are right or wrong, regardless of the context of the act”.(Philosophy, n.d). I believe that there is a right and a wrong in the world (absolutism) but,

    Read More

  • Dr. Kevorkian's Utilitarianism

    1688 Words  | 4 Pages

    What makes an act moral? The reality is that there is no right answer. Different experiences and cultures an individual would identify with will naturally dictate the moral reasoning he/she would act upon. However, certain situations can only be regarded as either moral or immoral. This is shown primarily through the philosophy of Immanuel Kant. He argued that acts such as killing or lying are never justified and one must uphold that in order to be a moral individual. When Dr. Kevorkian decided to assist his patients in committing suicide he was ultimately responsible for the murder of 130 patients. Not only did he commit acts that are morally wrong, but also contradicted his oath as a physician. In this incident, there was no exception or

    Read More

  • Cultural Relativism: Objective Right Or Wrong

    967 Words  | 2 Pages

    Cultural Relativism states that there is no objective right or wrong. Right or wrong are defined by your society’s moral code. I will provide reasons why we should not be cultural relativists. My reasons include; how it affects philosophy, the Cultural Differences Argument, examples of why it doesn’t work and societal needs.

    Read More

  • Utilitarianism vs. Cultural and Ethical Relativism

    718 Words  | 2 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Difference Between Relativism And Moral Objectivism

    1394 Words  | 3 Pages

    In the attempt to explain morality, two prominent theories exist- moral relativism and moral objectivism. Morality in a sense is difficult to explain, both theories attempt to shed a bit of light in way to break down its complexity. Moral Relativism argues in the view that morality exists only due to the fact that it is relative, or in respect to, cultural or individual beliefs. In a sense, it is up to the people to determine what is right and wrong. On the other hand, moral objectivism views that morality is not parallel, or relative, to one 's beliefs. That it is independent and not subjective to one 's interpretations, thus it is objective and universal moral facts exist. Louis. P. Pojman, an American philosopher and professor,

    Read More

  • Moral Relativism and Problems Associated With this Philosophy

    824 Words  | 2 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Moral Objectivism Vs Moral Relativism

    1352 Words  | 3 Pages

    In ones adolescent years, an important figure or role model taught the values of morality, the importance between right and wrong and the qualities of good versus bad. As the years, decades, and centuries have passed by, the culture of morality and the principles that humankind lives by have shifted and changed over time. In the article, “Folk Moral Relativism”, the authors, Hagop Sarkissian, John Park, David Tien, Jennifer Cole Wright and Joshua Knobe discuss six different studies to support their new hypothesis. However, in order to understand this essay, one must comprehend the difference between moral objectivism and moral relativism, which is based on whether or not the view of what someone else believes in, is morally correct or incorrect. For instance, moral objectivism is not centered on a person’s beliefs of what is considered right and wrong, but instead, is founded on moral facts.

    Read More

  • Thesis Statement On Moral Relativism

    1003 Words  | 3 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Moral Relativism

    1958 Words  | 4 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Unquestionable Fidelity

    1458 Words  | 3 Pages

    Diving into the elements of moral absolutism and moral relativism, one must first analyze the definition of each. According to Kennedy Adarkwa, moral absolutism is whether a certain conduct or action is eternally right or always wrong, regardless of how an individual tries to rationalize the idea. What an individual deems as a moral absolute usually stems from the views they learned as a child and have grown into one’s own personal values ...

    Read More

  • Ethical Relativism and Cultural Relativism

    714 Words  | 2 Pages

    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...

    Read More

More about Ethical Relativism And Ethical Absolutism

Open Document