...Moral absolutism is the ethical belief that there are rules that are absolute and should be followed under all circumstances. Moral absolutist do not take into consideration the context of the act, as having the absolute rules allows them to judge the moral question fairly. Moral absolutism is a deontological belief. This means that there a set rules and one action must either be intrinsically right or wrong. Intrinsically wrong means there is no information or circumstances that can be provided to a wrong doing to make it right at all. Killing/ murder/ euthanasia is an example of something that is intrinsically wrong. Even if the person where slowly dying and were in large amounts of pain and asked you to help them by stopping they’re suffering, even done with the right intent to do something good, it is intrinsically wrong. Intrinsically wrong is the opposing of intrinsically wrong. In the eyes of a theist, absolute laws come from God. For Christians, the Ten Commandments are an example of absolutes. They believe that these are the laws that god told us to follow and so are absolute. The ten commandments reads ‘do not steal’, so for a Christian following the 10 commandments, stealing will always be wrong, even if it were the only option and you had to do so in order for you and a loved one to survive. Christians also follow a believed hierarchy of absolutes. There is a duty of god, then the duty to others and lastly the duty to property. ...
Words: 753 - Pages: 4
...Explain the difference between moral absolutism and relativism (25) There are two different ways in distinguishing whether something is right or wrong within ethics. Absolutism is a deontological theory, which determines whether an action is intrinsically right or wrong. Whereas relativism is a teleological theory, which determines whether an action is right or wrong based on the outcomes of the action, on its consequences, this is linked with situation ethics and consequentialism. They are two different ways in approaching ethics. Absolutism is a moral command that is objectively and universally right or wrong for all people, in all times, places and cultures. It can be said to be deontological and so something is either right or wrong intrinsically (in itself) and therefore consequences have no bearing. Whereas, relativism is a subjective theory and believe that all truth is relative and dependent upon the values of an individual or society or even situation. Relativism is a teleological approach and therefore takes into account the consequences of a situation. Therefore there are many differences between moral absolutism and relativism. An example of absolutism would be the Ten Commandments, that Natural Law portrays, which are absolute, ‘do not murder’, as this is a law that applies to everyone. Therefore an absolutist would say that it is always wrong to murder in every, and any situation. In contrast, a relativist might argue that in some situations, given the outcome...
Words: 656 - Pages: 3
...6 Major Ethic Systems Kayleigh Turvin Liberty University There are six major ethics systems: antinomianism, situationism, generalism, unqualified absolutism, conflicting absolutism, and graded absolutism. The first three of the six major ethic systems are represented as non-Christian based beliefs. The second three are Christian based. These six systems are different in many qualities. I think we should be aware of each of these ethical systems. Antinomianism comes from two Greek words, anti which means against and nomos which means law (Antinomianism. (n.d).). With this being said we can see that Antinomianism means against the law, against God’s moral law. According to the article on Antinomianism, the people in this world are always looking for the easy way out of things because that is how they want to live their life. This means that they always want to accomplish things in their life but they will never be on the right track. For instance if they are wanting to make lifestyle changes like dieting then they want it to be easy, they want to be able to eat what they want but also be slim at the same time (Antinomianism. (n.d).). People like this do not care to work for the things they want they just like everything that is made easy. Antinomianism also means lawlessness, which is salvation, made easy (Antinomianism. (n.d).). These type people that we have been talking about think that you can be lawlessness and go to heaven. The second and third major ethic systems...
Words: 1102 - Pages: 5
...them. They are applied in the decisions we make in are day to day life and even the choices we make for our future. For many their ethics and morals are things that they learn through their upbringing and their life experiences. Others also apply their faith to their already instilled ethics and morals. In the paragraphs below I will be defining unqualified absolutism, conflicting absolutism, and graded absolutism and give examples of different scenarios involving all three ethical systems. Then finally I will conclude by identifying which ethical system that I use most often when making ethical decisions. Unqualified absolutism is defined by the book as the view that there are many moral absolutes that never actually conflict; all alleged conflicts are only apparent, but not real. Under unqualified absolutism it states that we are able to avoid doing wrong. Under this system it states that right and wrong is determined by Gods laws and those laws are what we should follow in order to not do wrong. Under this system lying is not permitted because it is wrong. Under no circumstance should you lie to solve any issue that you might incur. The philosophy of this system tells us that there are no true moral conflicts, because God always provides us with the solution to our problem (Geisler, 2010). To me the best example of unqualified absolutism would be a young child. I say this because as a child I could not lie to my Father. I told the truth no matter what it was just who I was...
Words: 1487 - Pages: 6
...Moral relativism vs Moral absolutism Moral Relativism Moral relativism is the insight that there are no obvious ethical truths and that moral facts are only relative to a given individual. According to this theory what is morally good for one person or culture might be morally bad for another, and vice versa: there are no moral absolutes. Moral relativism holds that ethical truths are of this latter kind. According to moral relativism, ethical truths are subjective rather than objective. This means that whether lying is wrong, for example, can vary from person to person or from culture to culture. It may be that for some people, or in some cultures, it is wrong, but that for other people, or in other cultures it isn‘t. In one mild form, moral relativism can seem obvious. Of course different people have different moral obligations: I have a duty to pay my credit card bill; you do not. Each of us is in different circumstances, and those circumstances affect what we ought and ought not to do. Morality is therefore relative to circumstances. Moral truths are relative to people or groups of people. Moral relativism holds that two different people in identical circumstances can, for no other reason than that they are different people, have different obligations. This is a much stronger claim than that morality is relative to circumstances. Moral absolutism Moral absolutism is the ethical theory which believes that there are always absolute rules of which moral questions can be judged...
Words: 506 - Pages: 3
...difficulty involving with this challenging question. I was always curious and interested in the difference between ethics and morals. When I was making decision, there had been several aspects and sources helping me to figure out why I did that, it sometimes was from my family, or religion, even situation. In my opinion, I believe that I don’t really make moral decision and form values within a culture that affects me as well as formed system of thinking that I have developed for years. As the book, “Moral of the story”, explains the origin and the arising question of what is moral, committing suicide is one of the issues that I have already faced. Through secondary and now high school, I usually was told and read about the phenomenon of students themselves dying recklessly. When I was at 11th grade, I saw a boy jumping out from the fourth floor, because of the pressure of study that his parents expected from him. It saddens me to think that one could possibly want to choose death over life and I still don’t quite understand it. For me, it is a foolish and moral action. The shortest definition I’ve heard, is that morals are how you treat people you know and ethics are how you treat people you don’t know. So who is the one knowing best about you but yourself ? Morals define personal character, while ethics stress a social system in which those morals are applied. In my country, studying extra classes is somehow an unquestionable thing to do. The way we merely learnt daily from...
Words: 1007 - Pages: 5
...Ethics Ethical development is an important tool needed in today’s society. In this paper, the topic will discuss the similarities and differences between virtue theory, utilitarianism, and deontological ethics. In addition this papers topic will address how each theory addresses ethics and morality in relation to the authors’ personal experiences with virtue, values, and moral concepts. Similarities and Differences in Ethics Theories To understand the similarities between virtue theory, utilitarianism, and deontological ethics the first order is to define the meaning of each. According to Boylan (2009), virtue theory has a definition of cultivating excellence in life and constituting an aspect of the “good person” (Boylan, 2009). Utilitarianism according to Boylan (2009),” is a theory that suggests that an action is morally right when that action produces more total utility for the group than any other alternative” (p. 153). Deontological ethics have a definition as an analysis of reason, this analysis position decisions based for the morally justified good. The similarities between the three theories represent the good in people and how they strive for excellence and justified good. The differences in the three theories begin with the ethics and morality. Virtue theory describes a person’s character, cultivating “excellence in all we do” (Boylan, 2009, p. 43). Striving for excellence can be challenging at times by deciding what is the most choice worthy decision in life. Utilitarianism...
Words: 293 - Pages: 2
...opposing worldviews. 4. The cultural relativist believes that moral beliefs are nothing more than cultural norms. 5. A moral absolute would be true for all people at all times, and is not subject to change. 6. This philosophy asserts that all human actions can ultimately be understood by observing cause and effect 7. “__________________” said that “Man is the measure of all things 8. These theories specifically focus on the results/end of an act to determine the morality of that act. 9. Which of the following statements gives the best description/s of Subjectivism: 10. John Calvin’s teachings may be considered by some to be an example of: 11. The subjectivity of defining pleasure means that a hedonist could justify injustices. 12. A theistic determinist believes that everything must be determined by God for Him to remain sovereign. 13. The Old Testament law was intended by God to save man from their sin. 14. “_________________” is the idea that self-interest or personal happiness should be the goal of all actions. 15. By definition, “__________________” is the view that right and wrong depends upon one’s culture, social group, or personal perspective 16. “Soft” determinism is not as fatalistic in nature as hard determinism. 17. The subjective relativist believes that truth is subject to individual interpretation and experience. 18. Hedonism does not acknowledge the existence of moral absolutes. 19. As Christians, the Bible should be...
Words: 319 - Pages: 2
...Unit 1 Assignment 2: Ethics Statement Jeremy Robinson A fundamental decision in communication ethics concerns how absolute or relative your ethical standards will be. Will you use the same absolute standards for every communication interaction or will your ethical choices be relative and depend on each situation? Absolute ethical standards mean exactly what they sound like and represent an absolute or unchanging standard for ethics in every situation. Telling the absolute truth in every situation would be an example of absolute ethical standard because no matter the situation you never change how you would handle it. A relative ethical standard is when you choose your ethics based on the independent situation. In some situations you choose to be truthful but in others you choose to omit the truth or choose not to speak at all because the consequences of doing so would be far more damaging than just letting the situation go. I believe that my ethical standards are more relative due to the fact that no situation is the same and being that no situation is the same no outcome is the same. Life itself is relative therefore you must bend and twist with it. If you hold absolutists ethical standard you will give the same answers to every situation but receive wildly different outcomes, most probably not being in your favor. It is an essential part of your life to try to engineer it to fit your purposes and to receive the outcomes with the greatest gains in your...
Words: 253 - Pages: 2
...being moral or nonmoral. It is sometimes called agent-based or character ethics. It is you striving for excellence in what and how you do things in your life. (Boylan, 2009) DEONTOLOGY-this theory is about doing one’s duty of a particular action because that action is right and not because of any other calculations of the action such as what the consequences of the action might be. (Boylan, 2009) UTILTARIANISM-this theory is where you put the needs of the team before your own needs for the betterment of the team. Your actions are morally right because it produces a more total unity for the team. (Boylan, 2009) The similarities of each of these theories are that it involves how you act in your everyday life to follow what you believe to be the right thing to do. In all three theories your moral beliefs play a significant role. The difference would be the outcome of any particular situation in which you are involved in and how you come to the conclusion. With virtue ethics being about you character your goal is to strive for excellence whereas in deontology your goal is to perform your duty as other might see as being the right thing and in utilitarianism you have the best interest of others in mind. One major difference between deontology and unitarianism is that in deontology will recommend an action based upon principle which is justified through an understanding of the aqction, the nature of reason, and the operation of the will which results in a moral command...
Words: 553 - Pages: 3
...in the thought process of the theory. “The utilitarianism theory suggests that an action is morally right when that action produces more total utility for the group than any other alternative” (Boylan, 2009, Chapter 12). This theory is an excellent idea and can work sometimes depending on the size of the group and what the group’s objective or goal is. However, many times when dealing with several people in a group it is difficult to have every person share the same beliefs or act a certain to please the group. There is normally a person or people within the group that would sacrifice not achieving the goal of the group just so they can individually stand out or try to accomplish a personal goal These people show poor ethics and moral beliefs and are usually disliked by the other members of the group. The deontological theory is based off the belief that all people should do what is morally correct all the time. Even if there is a law or rule against the...
Words: 484 - Pages: 2
...Case 1.1 1a. Whether or not dumping should be permitted is a moral question. 1b. "Are dangerous products of any use in the third world?" is a nonmoral question. 1c. "Is it proper for the U.S. government to sponsor the export of dangerous products overseas?" is a moral question. 1d. Whether or not the notification system works as its supporters claim it works is a nonmoral question. 1e. "Is it legal to dump this product overseas?" is a nonmoral question. 2. Dumping is a method of getting rid of unwanted products or substances that are harmful to people, animals, or the environment by exporting them to other countries in order to make a profit or mitigate a loss. An example used in the text is the flame resistant pajamas that were recalled because they contained Tris. These pajamas were dumped in overseas markets to help negate the company’s loss. 3. Dumpers dump because they want to either make a profit or avoid a loss in profit. I am sure some of the companies employees may have second thoughts on dumping, but not “making your number” can be quite a motivator to sidestep your moral beliefs. If I were one of the manufacturers of the Tris pajamas, I would have a hard time sending a product that I know to be toxic to a market with less restrictive regulations, but I think ultimately, I would do it if all information was disclosed not only to the government, but to the end purchaser as well. 4. Just because no laws may be broken does not mean it is always...
Words: 778 - Pages: 4
...If you have ever been in a situation where you feel torn between agreeing and disagreeing on something, you will realize that the world has a grey area. While it is easy to agree, or disagree on something, it is also easy to not know, or not particularly choose one. In Act Three of “The Crucible”, Danforth argues that the world is “black and white”. Portraying the world as either black or white distorts reality. Limiting people to believe that things are either right or wrong restricts humans’ complex mind. Don’t get me wrong, I do believe that people have a moral responsibility. In fact, some decisions people make are just uncalled for, egregious, and quite frankly evil. No one has the right to hurt and harm others without some type of...
Words: 659 - Pages: 3
...Ethical relativism Ethical relativism is when an action that is being practiced is thought to be moral in one country but can be immoral and made illegal in another country. Whether it is right or wrong depends on the social norm in that culture or part of the world. There is no universal moral standard or global law that the world has to abide by at all times. Ethical relativism can also be based on personal moral beliefs based on emotion rather than reason. The reason why ethical relativism is so pervasive in American society is because the United States is occupied with many different races and culture from all around the world. It is also a country where you have the freedom to do what you want within reason. You have a country where people are going to bring their beliefs here whether right or wrong. Also, people who were born here were taught a certain way growing up. I believe that this goes back to personal beliefs you have as a person. As people grow up, they tend to think for themselves and start to have personal beliefs and emotions whether they are right or wrong on something. I believe that people eventually will do what they even thought they know it’s morally wrong. For example, serial killers kill people and they know it morally wrong and illegal to do so but they still do it because personally they feel the act is justified for whatever reason. Another example is in a show called “Dexter”, where the main character Dexter is a serial killer. His...
Words: 329 - Pages: 2
...Ashley undergo a hysterectomy as well as have her breast buds removed. The way Ashley’s parents handled her condition raises a serious moral question of right and wrong. Were Ashley’s parents right to do what they did and was it even their decision to make in the first place; or was what they did wrong for mutilating Ashley’s body when she had no say in the matter? You could argue for Ashley’s parents and the decision to give Ashley the surgeries by saying that they are Ashley’s legal guardians, and that means they know what is best for her. You could also say the surgeries would make taking care of Ashley easier for the parents as well as make life easier for Ashley by making her body consistent with her mental abilities. The decision to have the surgery was also approved by the hospital’s ethics board which has a duty to not approve unethical procedures. You could also argue that the decision Ashley’s parents made to give her the surgeries was morally wrong. Some might say that the decision to keep Ashley’s body small didn’t benefit Ashley at all, but rather was entirely beneficial to her family. Other arguments are that there were other options to take care of Ashley and that her disability didn’t justify the decision to mutilate her body. Whichever way you view Ashley’s case, it brings up some issues about morality and tough moral questions. Moral questions cannot be answered by what...
Words: 552 - Pages: 3
