ipl-logo

Summary: A Defense Of Ethical Relativism

1201 Words5 Pages

A Defense of Ethical Relativism
Benedict views morality as something that depends on the different\ histories and environments of different cultures. Yes, I believe she is correct stating that our culture is “but one entry in a long series of possible adjustments”. Why? Because what is considered moral in one society may be considered immoral in a different society, but each individual society is correct. She asserts morals are culturally defined based on what’s considered the appropriate behavior in each society.

To determine aspects start with a list of criteria it would be good to evaluate. The questions will be categorized into descriptive or perspective. It might get more of one than another. Some aspects can't be separated. "Better" …show more content…

It asserts that actions are determined as immoral or moral based on how society perceives and accepts those actions, which causes tolerance of all actions to be considered moral and accepted by society. In addition, it allows for tolerance of genocide and nuclear war as long as the culture considers these actions as morally acceptable. Ethical relativism entails the inter-cultural tolerance. Subjective Ethical Relativism (Subjectivism), is where right and wrong get their meaning from the individual only. As many students sometimes maintain, "Morality is in the eye of the beholder." We treat morality like taste or aesthetic judgments person relative. This form of moral subjectivism has the sorry consequence that it makes morality a very useless concept, for, on its premises, little or no interpersonal criticism or judgment is logically …show more content…

He is certain that what he did it’s just because in his head he truly thought that only way he could truly become free, truly unfettered, he had to become truly uninhibited and that’s what lead him to rape and murder it victims. He didn’t gain any remorse of what he did, in the contrary he said that to him that there is absolutely no comparison between the pleasure he might take in eating ham, and the pleasure he anticipated in raping and murdering his victims. Even if moral judgments are subjective, it does not follow that they are not rational or practical. The reasoning behind the moral value it only suffices if you choose to accept that reasoning. Moral subjectivism does not entail a lack of adherence to moral law. It only changes the reasons for adhering to moral law, and how an individual views moral judgments, i.e., opinion rather than truth. An individual who lives in a given society has an obligation to live by the law of the land. This is Gewirth's golden rule: "Agents must act in accord with the generic rights of others as well as their own." If an individual infringes upon their social contract, they are liable to be brought to task for their transgressions. Moral subjectivism does not exhaust moral

Show More
Related
198 Words | 1 Pages

Rachels and Benedict disagree about how relative is morality.in one hand Rachels express that morality is not relative, because from his point of view what is right or wrong cannot be based in one society code; it is clear that what is approved in one culture can be disapproved in other, so there is no absolute true nor a single standard to follow. Rachels state that there are some moral rules that all societies will have in common, because those rules are necessary for society to exist. According to this he think that there is some universal codes that have to be maintain for a healthy balance. Benedict in the other hand believes that morality is relative.

Read More
1376 Words | 6 Pages

The final chapter, chapter 21, of Russ Shafer-Landau’s book, The Fundamentals of Ethics, emphasis is placed on the fact that moral objectivity is not always completely universal but does not mean the idea of moral objectivism has to be rejected. Moral objectivism states that moral standards should be universal but there are some circumstances and exceptions to this claim. Shafer-Landau presents eleven arguments in chapter 21 that some consider challenges to the universality principle of moral objectivity. Not only will moral objectivism be examined in this paper but also another philosophical view known as moral skepticism will be discussed. In addition to the arguments present by Shafter-Landau’s book this paper will include an analysis from

Read More
639 Words | 3 Pages

In the text, The Ethical Life, by Russ Shafer-Landau, it questions Jonathan Bennett’s morality and sympathy and how the two of them can come into conflict. Morality and sympathy are connected, but still very different. Throughout this chapter, Jonathan Bennett outlines many important points and factors that go into these connections and how they can overlap and conflict. Jonathan Bennett says morality can be “bad1.” This type of morality is one that Bennett strongly disagrees with, no so much that one’s morality is actually proven to be bad or even untrue.

Read More
1781 Words | 8 Pages

What is morality? The Oxford Dictionary defines it as “a particular system of values and principles of conduct, especially one held by a specified person or society.” In the book A Separate Peace by John Knowles, the two main characters, Gene and Finny have very different moral attitudes. Gene’s morals are realistic and applicable to the real world while Finny’s are honorable, righteous, and ideal, but lack a sense of reality and as a result, he is unable to accept the truth about human nature, and ends up with serious consequences. Although Finny is extremely righteous and honorable, his ethics lack a sense of reality and as a result, he ends up with serious consequences.

Read More
424 Words | 2 Pages

Moral Relativism, should it be abandoned or not? This was the original question that came to my mind when starting off reading this excerpt. Mary Midgley, the author of this story, mentioned that now days we as people deny that we will ever be able to understand a culture that is not our own. That got me thinking and as I was thinking I found what she said to be relatively true. I feel as if society has shaped us as young adults to judge our culture as being the best and all other cultures as coming up second best.

Read More
1103 Words | 5 Pages

According to Ethical Relativism, there are no universal truths, which apply to all human beings at all times, and proposes that moral principles should be viewed as "local, conventional, subjective and self-justified" (Yardley, 2012). While ethical principles should conform to social, cultural norms and moral beliefs and practices are frequently products of cultural upbringing, the basis for Ethical Relativism is fundamentally unsound because it can be used to justify and rationalize practices and behaviors that are inherently immoral, such as racism, discrimination, hate crimes and oppression. Ethical African

Read More
1268 Words | 6 Pages

Morality is a set of values held by a person in making when judging and evaluating what is deemed right or wrong, good or bad (Brandt, 1959). When we talk about morality in counseling it’s about the reasoning by the counselor that has four levels. They are, personal intuition, ethical guidelines established by professional organizations, ethical principles and general theories of moral action (Kitchener, 1984). Ethics is described as adopted principles that has relations to man’s behavior and moral decision making (Van Hoose & Kottler, 1985). Ethics is often thought as a synonym to morality.

Read More
709 Words | 3 Pages

This is because of moral relativism’s take on ethical dilemmas, and the view that there are a number of disagreements among people as to the nature of morality. An act can

Read More
1889 Words | 8 Pages

Aristotle’s virtue ethics differs from other moral theories. Unlike deontology and consequentialism, virtue ethics emphasizes and describes moral characters (virtues). In my paper, I am going to explore the objection to virtue ethics from a relativist point of view and the responses to this objection that were presented in Nussbaum’s paper “A non-relative approach to virtue ethics.” Furthermore, I am going to present two out of three relativist objections to her responses that she anticipated, and her responses to them.

Read More
1385 Words | 6 Pages

Evaluating the morality within ourselves they evaluate morality on the principle of what is wrong or right. As equally

Read More
1178 Words | 5 Pages

Philosophy 2200C Taylor Pearl Paper #1 The Cultural Differences Argument for Moral Relativism In this paper I will be discussing the theory of the Cultural Differences Argument for Moral Relativism and also the flaws this theory holds. First I will explain the general idea of Moral Relativism, followed by two examples of cultural differences that are often cited to further explain this theory. After that I will discuss what the Cultural Differences Argument is for Moral Relativism.

Read More
1070 Words | 5 Pages

In this prompt the argument that Morality exists is irrelevant, contrary to our thoughts and beliefs. Everyone follows a set of moral rules. Ethical relativists disagree with this belief because, they believe that morals are distinctive from each individual culture. These relativists as described are mixing up moral and cultural distinctions, or are simply not willing to completely understanding the cultures they are standing up for. There are two different types of relativism Ethical, and Cultural, that rely upon the argument of cultural differences, which have flaws that make the argument unsound.

Read More
1020 Words | 5 Pages

Every society has its own unique cultures in which people will have different ideas of moral codes. The diversity of these cultures cannot be said to be correct or incorrect. Every society has independent standards of ethic within their society and these standards are culture-bound. Cultural Relativism has a perception in which rightness or wrongness of an action depends entirely within the bounds of the culture. This theory opposes the belief in the objectivity of moral truth.

Read More
2321 Words | 10 Pages

In other words, “right” or “wrong” are culture specific, what is considered moral in one society may be considered immoral in another, and, since no universal standard of morality that exist, no one has the right to judge another societies custom (Ess, 2009). Cultural Relativism is closely related to ethical relativism, which views truth as variable and not absolute. What makes up right and wrong is determined solely by individual or the society (Ess, 2009). Since the truth is not object, there can be no standards which applies to all cultures.

Read More
2607 Words | 11 Pages

The Strength and Vulnerability of Different Moral Views Over centuries of fervent discussion in the moral world, there is still nothing like a consensus on a set of moral views. This essay attempts to outline and critically evaluate two moral views, namely ethical objectivism and cultural relativism. It is crucial to understand that both moral theories cannot be true at the same time as it results in contradictions, contributing to false beliefs. Additionally, it is essential that we discuss these issues with an open-mind so as to gain deeper insights from them. First and foremost, we will be looking at the prominent view of ethical objectivism.

Read More

More about Summary: A Defense Of Ethical Relativism

Related Topics

Open Document