ipl-logo

Ethical Relativism Analysis

1083 Words5 Pages

My purpose in this essay is to explain and evaluate ethical relativism. Ethical relativism states that there are no moral absolutes, therefore, no moral right or wrong. While this theory does have many advantages to it, such that it can promote acceptance and equality, I have to disagree with this theory because it can result in more harm than good. I believe there has to be some moral truths in order for society to not become chaotic.
Ethical relativism or also known as moral relativism denies that moral values and norms are objective or universal and declares that there is no absolute truth. The truth is relative to the subject and can differ from person to person and from society to society. Ethical relativism states that our morals and …show more content…

One weakness is that it fails to recognize that certain moral values are universal. Everyone is entitled to set their own moral code of conduct. This theory implies that we cannot condemn murder or rape and allows for no evaluation of terrible things due to another person’s belief. If a person’s morality defined actions such as rape and murder to be good, then they would be legally viable. Ethical relativism is also based on the idea that we are all perfect. Many people strive to do good every day, but we are not perfect. We get upset, forgetful, and even lie. Without a moral code in place, anything could happen when we come across these moments of imperfection. While ethical relativism states that it creates a lack of diversity, it actually may lead to the opposite. Relativism encourages an individualistic viewpoint so that the only morals and values in place are those set by the individual, which means that everyone is always seeking their own side. This can create a lack of diversity because the emphasis of society is on individualistic gain that can come at another’s expense. This certain argument is very interesting to me because it shows that of the strengths for ethical relativism is actually one of its weaknesses as …show more content…

While ethical relativism has its advantages because it could create a peaceful society, that is not always the case. Relativism does not accept that certain moral values are universal. Just because cultures differ, that does not mean there are no moral values and norms, like murder or child abuse. Determining what is morally right or wrong is an difficult thing, and each individual has a different belief about it. So, by allowing everyone to follow their own moral code, it could lead to chaotic society. If you are upset at someone, you can kill that person without any consequences because your moral code accepts murder. There is no real way to keep people safe in this type of society, and each person is responsible for protecting themselves. While ethical relativism can promote people coming together, it can also encourage people to stay away from one another. Because each person does not know what values and norms another person has, in order to keep oneself safe, it causes people to draw away from others. Another reason why I disagree with this theory is because it is self-contradictory by stating that two views can both be right. If it is true that nothing is right or wrong, then why believe this theory if there are no absolute truths? By stating that there are no objective truths, that is an objective

Show More
Related
308 Words | 2 Pages

To better explain, moral relativism states that moral judgments are true or false, but “only relative to some particular standpoint

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
247 Words | 1 Pages

There are three assumptions to have an ethical system: desires for eternal authority and making decisions, and need for God. In order to have a credible ethical system, it is important to have a desire for eternal authority, and a desire to decide for ourselves. If we have a desire for eternal authority we understand that there are things above us, and that the things above us should govern for us or help us govern. If we have a desire to decide for ourselves we can have our own opinions, and help make decisions for a credible ethical system. The desires for eternal authority and to decide for ourselves are examples of primitives.

Read More
964 Words | 4 Pages

Do you agree or disagree with conventional ethical relativism that there are no objective moral principles, but that all valid moral principles are justified by virtue of their cultural acceptance? Explain your answer and why you agree or disagree. I agree with conventional ethical relativism that there are no objective moral principles other than justified by the virtue of cultural acceptance. In regard to the dependency thesis as it relates to conventional ethical relativism, right or wrong acts of individuals depend on the nature of the society that molds them. Until recently cultures have developed independently with their own history, beliefs, and subcultures intrinsic of their specific moral principles.

Read More
783 Words | 4 Pages

James Rachels thinks this argument is invalid because ethic is determined by the group of people on what they choose to believe in. Rachels emphasizes on such relativism does not base on one person’s belief, but on multiple people’s thinking. Using his definition of cultural relativism is when a group of people agree on the

Read More
102 Words | 1 Pages

Our moral beliefs indicate the kind of environment or culture we grew up in. Therefore, if we were born in Somalia, we would believe that it is morally right to go through female circumcision as a rite of passage. However, if we grew up in the western world, then we would not believe in female circumcision. We can therefore see the relativist 's argument of cultural relativism in this case, because if cultural relativism exists, then naturally, morality will also be relative. Additionally, to support his stance, the relativist will also argue that tolerance comes into play when it comes to cultural relativism.

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
657 Words | 3 Pages

In “A Refutation of Moral Relativism,” Peter Kreeft argues that there are no moral absolutes because of the different cultures. Kreeft presents the moral relativism argument in his first two premises, through modus tollens, that if moral absolutism was true, then all would agree and that not everyone agrees. The conclusion that follows is that moral absolutism is false. Although many cultures practice different moral values, it does not mean that there is no absolute morally correct value.

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
546 Words | 3 Pages

By presenting the idea that everyone's moral beliefs and values are equally valid, there is no way to resolve moral disagreements or to determine which moral beliefs and values are more reasonable or justifiable. My argument against moral relativism is that it allows for harmful or unjust practices to be considered acceptable if it is culturally justified. One horrific example is moral relativism can have implications for how individuals and societies perceive and respond to practices such as honor killings. Moral relativism allows for honor killings to be seen as acceptable or justified in certain cultural contexts as a legitimate response to violations of cultural norms and

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 Ethical Relativism Analysis

Related Topics

Open Document