ipl-logo

Moral Relativism

708 Words3 Pages

All truth in the world is relative. There is no such thing as an absolute truth, so there is no way to definitely make choices about how a person should live his/her life. Since there is not a conclusive guide to use to make everyday decisions, it is up to the moral standards of the era and location at a given time to be the basis for decisions to be made. By looking deeper into the philosophical idea of relativism, all truth is relative and this fluctuating continuum sets the foundation for making judgements on how to live life. By using this as the framework for all truth, it is evident to see how truth can be found by looking at a term defined as moral relativism, a person named David Hume, and a collection of research that supports this idea of things being true at a certain time. Moral relativism “is the position that moral or ethical propositions do not reflect objective and/or universal …show more content…

Hume “distinguished between matters of fact and matters of value, and suggested that moral judgments consist of the latter because they do not deal with verifiable facts obtained in the world, but only with our sentiments and passions” ("Moral Relativism"1). By looking at Hume’s ideas, it becomes apparent that there cannot be a definite truth in the world because the world is always changing and it is close to impossible to lock something down as a complete truth. An example ensues when looking at things in our modern scientific age. As described by Mitchell, “[Humans] tend to demand proof by which we means something more than “I believe this to be true” . . . We believe many things to be true, but belief alone does not guarantee truth” (Mitchell 270). This being said, every decision a human makes requires that humans look deeper into what they consider the truth and be willing to accept that the truth may not be set in

Show More
Related
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
144 Words | 1 Pages

The divine command theory states that the deeds that are good and evil only because the almighty god himself commands it. This was the one single notion that kept most people away from committing the so-called ‘sins’, because it delivers an answer to the disturbing instances of moral relativism and the objectivity of ethics. This was trumped by Plato’s Euthyphro argument in which Socrates inquires ‘Is something right because the god commands it, does god command it because it’s right?’ This argument’s moral allegations imply that the bond between ethical behavior and religion might not be as simple as previously thought.

Read More
422 Words | 2 Pages

C.S. Lewis had three main objectives to moral relativism. The first one is the Moral law of right and wrong. Lewis says, “whenever you find a man who says he does not believe in right and wrong, you will find the same man going back on this a moment later” (Lewis, 2007, p.19). “He may break his promise to you, but if you try breaking one to him he will be complaining” (Lewis, 2007, p.17). What Lewis is saying is that people often feel that if someone does something wrong to them then it is morally wrong, however when the roles are reversed and they do something wrong to someone else then it is not morally considered wrong from their point of view.

Read More
1185 Words | 5 Pages

A worldview is a person’s perception of the world around them and how it came to be. This also applies to how one views other peoples’ moral codes in comparison to their own. According to Sire, a person’s worldview is being seen as a “commitment” to a person’s moral standing, or rather, their worldview is dictated by the person’s very self (20). This aids in one’s ability to set a foundation for their beliefs that they live their lives according too (Sire, 21). This also plays a factor in an individual’s personal code of ethics.

Read More
304 Words | 2 Pages

It can be controversial because moral relativism is a philosophy that claims that there is no global or an absolute moral law. Having this relativistic idea of morality, individuals believe that there is not a single true morality, that there are a variety of possible moralities or moral frames of reference. However whether something is morally right or wrong, good or bad, just or unjust, and so on it is up to perception to judge whether something is moral or immoral. The position

Read More
1465 Words | 6 Pages

“Is Morality Relative or are there Objective Moral Truths?” In A Defense of Ethical Relativism by Ruth Benedict from her “Anthropology and the Abnormal,” Journal of General Psychology, in her part take on Modern Social Anthropology, Benedict views ethical relativism as part of the new modern civilization in which each society has their own moral views and “like a work of art” each culture has a theme and certain tendencies which they chose to favor. On the contrary, The Case Against Moral Relativism by Louis P. Pojman, moral relativism is viewed as a misled argument by relativists and explains in detail some of the moral differences in each culture and how this affects humanity as a whole. Subjectivism, “Morality is in the eye of the beholder,”

Read More
388 Words | 2 Pages

One of the strongest arguments against relativism discovered during our readings is how individuals take part in cultural traditions that appear morally wrong within one 's own beliefs (Mosser, 2013). So basically saying what may seem wrong to one person and one 's culture would not necessarily be wrong to the culture of the individual who believes that what they are doing is not wrong. A perfect example of this relativism behavior is infanticide. According to one article, it states that Eskimos "often kill perfectly normal infants, especially girls" (Rachels, 1999, para. 36). Consequently, an infant being killed in another culture across the world could very easily be permissible due to their own beliefs of controlling the ratio of females

Read More
1404 Words | 6 Pages

Hume on the other hand can only confirm what has already happened, being that is the most truthful and logical

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
1315 Words | 6 Pages

Nevertheless, facts based on reality become easier to reject wholesale, rather than using a thought process of discovery, which is why unchallengeable beliefs gain prominence in liberal circles, yet at the price of social divisions and decline. The moral relativism needed to produce the liberal world view means the outcome often bears no resemblance to actual events, itself taking on the fantasy of an Alice in Wonderland scenario. As a belief fails scientific inquiry, this consequently produces a no blame society devoid of any consensus morality and the inability to further distinguish right from wrong. Accepting a definition of morality requires a consensus of standards, entailing individual responsibility and accountability. Removing this consensus relegates moral truths to a plurality of opinions and if there are no moral truths, ergo there are no moral facts.

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

(Luco, Week 3 Notes, p.9) Cultural Relativism is simply a combination of the following three theses: 1. The only criterion of moral truth or falsehood is the moral code of a cultural group. 2. A moral claim is true, relative to a culture’s moral code, if and only if the claim is generally accepted within that cultural

Read More
1156 Words | 5 Pages

“[T]heory is the framework for observations and facts. Theories may change, or the way that they are interpreted may change, but the facts themselves don't change.” Once the facts and truths of the idea have been set, they cannot change. Eventually with enough facts (truths) this hypothesis can be claimed as a fact itself. It is deemed truth.

Read More
895 Words | 4 Pages

Cultural Relativism is a theory that states various cultures have their respective and distinct moral values. First introduced by anthropologist Franz Boas and popularized by his students, this theory was meant to explain the reasons behind the different practices carried out across different communities (Lewis, 2001). In recent years, modern philosophers James and Stuart Rachels openly disagreed with the validity of Cultural Relativism by claiming that all human communities hold the same fundemental values. This essay will argue for the validity of Cultural Relativism because different cultures have different goals, and therefore have their own distinct moral codes.

Read More

More about Moral Relativism

Open Document