Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
Ethical relativism reflection
Factors of ethical culture
Ethical relativism
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Ethical relativism reflection
Factors of ethical culture
Ethical relativism
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Analyse the importance of Christian ethical teachings in the life of Adherents worldwide. Christian ethical teachings are important to the life of Adherents worldwide. As a religion Christianity is fundamentally obligated to account for its Adherents actions and behaviour. Through a systematic understanding of what is ethically and morally correct Christianity has devised ethical guidelines from which Adherents could follow as a metaphorical moral compass.
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.
The Merriam-Webster Dictionary (2017) defines ethics as “the discipline dealing with what is good and bad and with moral duty and obligation.” Stealing food out from the office refrigerator belonging to another co-worker would be considered an act of bad behavior. If considering this same scenario under the Judeo-Christian religious view of ethics, the ideology is that one should treat others as they would hope to be treated (Parnell, 2008 p. 103). Interesting enough Parnell (2008) points outs that the religious views also has some implications of the integrative social contracts view of ethics, in that it highlights the assumptions of behavioral rights or wrongs that one should always maintain in life regardless of the situation (p. 103).
Cultural relativism is the idea that all cultures are of the same value and are equal/no one culture is above or better than another. Saying this, cultural relativists do not criticize other cultures or justify a practice as “right or wrong” but in turn try to see the culture through the eyes of the individuals within it. When conducting fieldwork, anthropologists use cultural relativism to better understand the culture without bias or judgment. To do this, anthropologists forget all preconceptions of a culture before studying and go into the work with an open mind and positive outlook.
We are all bound to make ethical judgments in our lives; everyone in this world is of the opinion that some things can be perceived as wrong and the others as right. We also get aggravated and annoyed when we see someone engaging in an act of behavior that falls under our definition of an unethical act. We are absolutely certain that the acts and decisions of someone like Adolf Hitler in World War II were wrong, or that sociopaths, pedophiles and possibly sex offenders are outright wrong in their specific acts of behavior. One might argue as to why these actions are classified as wrong and unethical. The main question that remains unanswered is by what principles does one determine what is morally right and wrong?
Universalism vs. Particularism indicates how a society applies rules of morals and ethics. The universalist are also known as “Rule-Based Approach” where the set rules cannot be violated or be bend. Policies, rules and even the laws are strictly applied to everyone and once violated a specific penalty will be provided. On the other hand, Particularism is based on logic of the heart and human friendship. They put high emphasis on relationship rather than rules where they always bend it for someone.
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
Which of the following is not a problem with Ethical Relativism: C) not academic enough 12. According to James Rachels, which of the following would be a universal
Although religion may play a power in the system of ethics, religion does not have to be present in order to have a system of ethics. Ethics is defined as moral principles that govern a person's behavior. A moral principle, or rule, is the distinction between right and wrong. Nowhere in the definition of ethics nor moral does it mention religion. Yes, it is true that religion has a set of their own moral principles in texts such as the Bible, the Torah, the Koran, etc.
Moral relativism is choosing morality based on the opinions and numbers of people relating to their cultures, society and opinions. Cultural relativism is the principle from gaining respect from different cultures. For example, Saudi’s do not shake or have eye contacts with females, and females cover their faces and hairs using scars and ‘neqaab’, while France does not alone anyone to cover their hairs by scarves and faces by neqaabs. France and Saudi should both respect cultures and not find it offensiveness or rudeness of disrespect. People have been raised from different cultures and value everything differently.
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
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.
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.
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.
In general, on a popular argument for ethical relativism would be the untenability of objectivism. It is a persuasive justification for moral relativism because it is the best alternative following the failure of objectivism. The fact that moral objectivists themselves are uncertain, incongruent and unsettled on a standard moral system is the primary catalyst encouraging moral skepticism (IEP, Argument for Moral Relativism). Cultural relativism outlines that “an action is morally right, relative to a culture, just because it is right according to the moral code which is generally accepted in that culture.” Conversely, if “an action is morally wrong, relative to a culture, just because it is wrong according to the moral code which is generally accepted in that culture.”