...Explain the origins and key ideas behind Absolutist and Relativist ethics. The Absolutist theory is that certain actions are right or wrong from an objective point of view; it doesn’t change according to culture. People are considered to have rational and self-determination – it means they are capable of making choices and acting upon them. So, someone who looks at something from a absolutist point of view doesn’t look at the result or the consequence of an action but the action itself, (they disregard the context of the act) actions are fundamentally right or wrong which means they are right or wrong in themselves. This approach to ethics is known as ‘deontological’. This has often been based on two different ethical theories Kantianism; the view that the only intrinsically good thing is a good will and utilitarianism; that the morally best action is the one that makes the most overall happiness. Religious views of ethics often come from an absolutist view. Moral absolutism may be understood in a strictly secular context, as in many forms of deontological moral rationalism. However, many religions have morally absolutist positions as well, regarding their system of morality as deriving from divine commands. Therefore, they regard such a moral system as absolute, (usually) perfect, and unchangeable. Many secular philosophies also take a morally absolutist stance, arguing that absolute laws of morality are inherent in the nature of human beings, the nature of life in general...
Words: 849 - Pages: 4
...‘A relativist approach to the issues raised by abortion leads to wrong moral choices.’ Discuss. One could indeed present the argument that a relativist approach to abortion could lead to the wrong moral choices. For example, in subjective ethical relativism, although one may be able to make a moral choice completely by themselves, there are no clear guidelines in which they have to adhere to. This may lead to corruptible behaviour, as people might delude themselves into thinking certain things that are wrong; are in fact right. Additionally, conventional ethical relativism, which considers society’s values, would most likely disregard the needs of the individual, rendering them to feel pressured by society to follow cultural tradition. This may lead to the wrong moral choice being made. For example if a woman would mentally suffer with the pregnancy, but is not allowed an abortion (such as in Uganda), this would be the wrong moral decision that has resulted from a conventional relativist approach to ethics. On the other hand, a relativist approach could also lead to the correct moral choices. For example, subjectivism allows the individual to make their own choice, which ultimately can be regarded as a good thing. Only the mother herself can really know if she wants an abortion, or if she would not be able to cope with the pregnancy both mentally and physically. A relativist approach to abortion allows for the individuals needs and circumstance to be considered, rather...
Words: 330 - Pages: 2
...are now making all the decisions for one hundred and seventy four other passengers, crewmembers and myself, although very intelligent and equally portray a common sense type of character, have a set of totally different ethical beliefs. The theorist with the divine command type of personality preached daily about “doing what God wants us to do” and how it’s important for parents to raise their children with a strong religious background if we want them to find eternal life with God. Don’t get me wrong, its not that I think he’s wrong or disagree, I just believe that my vacation time involves a lot of RR and I certainly don’t want to be discussing such personal matters with complete strangers. Now, the second gentleman whom I call the “relativist” seems like he has a good head on his shoulders. He’s very personable, courteous, and seems to be a very rational human being. He’s not critical of anyone, minds his own business and has been extremely tolerable with the divine command theorist and the conversations he has basically imposed on him with his beliefs. He’s a neutral type of guy that really wishes to be left alone to enjoy his wonderful...
Words: 2043 - Pages: 9
...click here (and go to page 8). I particularly like her use of link words to develop an argument, so I've highlighted them in blue. She scored 100% on this question. There is a small error that she attributes Ruth Benedict's quote to William Sumner. PBHow would a moral relativist define good? G572 Q1 June 2009a) Explain the concept of relativist morality.A moral relativist would question "what do we mean by good?" when deliberating the best, most moral action to take when faced with an ethical decision. An example of a relativist moral statement is, "I ought not to steal because I will cause suffering to those I still from." This is a reasonable statement, considering the consequences of a potential action. It is teleological, in that it is concerned with ends (Greek word "telos" meaning end or purpose). Relativism is in direct contrast with absolute morality which is deontological and concerned with the actions themselves. A moral relativist would not believe that there is a fixed set of moral rules that apply to all people all times, in all places. Rather, they would leave the morality is changeable and differs culture to culture time to time, and place to place. This idea is known as cultural relativism.The theory of relativist morality was first established by Protagoras who asked the question "what is good for You?" He did not believe that knowledge was fixed or that it extended beyond our experience in some higher form, as Plato (a moral absolutist) did. He stated that "man is the...
Words: 984 - Pages: 4
...For years, many philosophers have been concerned with finding a criterion of moral rightness. Indeed, a core issue in moral philosophy involved identifying whether universally moral values existed or not. Accordingly, this essay will demonstrate that, although the relativist stance on the philosophical problem may seem quite compelling, the universalist one ultimately proves itself to be the most applicable and reasonable. In other words, moral universalism will win over cultural relativism inasmuch as the relativist will fail to provide compelling responses to the universalist’s objections, as this essay will further explain. However, to balance out the debate, I will additionally highlight the benefits that the relativist theory brings to...
Words: 1487 - Pages: 6
...better system than moral absolutism” Moral relativism refers to the normative ethical system which rejects the idea of absolutes and instead believes that “man is the measure of all things”- which was skilfully expressed by Ruth Benedict. The moral relative system surpasses that of moral absolutism and this will be justified throughout this essay. Moral relativist systems exceed moral absolutist systems due to diversity. The system explains the different values that people hold and encourages diverse cultural expressions due to there being no rigidity or fixe ethical code. This allows for a better system as it signifies freedom of expression and people being able to share their opinions with each other, without there being a ‘right’ or ‘wrong’. This is due to the system prohibiting dominant cultures from enforcing itself over others simply because of a disparity of opinions. This means that all cultures are valued by a relativist as there is no objective knowledge that one must accept, they instead must accept all actions as equally valid in the society in which they take place. This would then make is difficult for a relativist to criticise religious acts such as Muslim women wearing a hijab in England , which is beneficial to society due to the lack of discrimination and ignorance. In conjunction with diversity, moral relativism is a better system than moral absolutism due to circumstantial aspects. Moral absolutism does not take into account the circumstances of a situation...
Words: 633 - Pages: 3
...Ethical Relativism Beau Fletcher An Introduction to Philosophy Professor Nicholas Hardaker The world is an immensely diverse and unique place with societies that are radically different from one another. Relativists argue that there is no universal ethical standard to identify what is right or wrong; instead, it is up to each society to develop a moral standard that is most compatible with their distinctive culture. Ethical Relativism argues that people should act within the moral standards set forth by their specific culture. It is also important to note that a society can evolve (as well as regress) over time, making way for a revised set of moral standards that are more compatible with sociological views at that time. I found it hard to identify many of my peers as having either a relativist, or absolutist position within the discussions. Many seem to have a conglomerate of the ‘best’ ideals from both sides of the spectrum. There are however, some great examples of both absolutist and relativist minds in the class discussions, being able to look at exactly how they both apply their reasoning to arrive at radically different stances on some fundamental questions about ethics and moral standards. Before I get into defining some examples of both relativist and absolutist ideologies, I want to start with a post from week two that is an excellent example of relativism in action and that shows how radically two different society’s moral standards can differ. In the post...
Words: 1585 - Pages: 7
...Abortion an age old ethical debate between moral right choice and wrong choice, why? To evaluate abortion with ethics, we must first understand the argument from all perspectives. What is the debate reason abortion is so fiercely argued in past and present generations? Abortion is the term to define the choice to terminate a woman’s pregnancy. Unitarian view, which is the view that relativist challenge. Utilitarian view suggest that abortion is not wrong because its selfish and benefits the mother not the unborn fetus, this is what Unitarians refer to as :ethical egoism”(Mosser,2010). Relativist view is just a little less judgmental, suggesting that some situations may be determined morally correct while others simply remain wrong. In this paper neither the argument that neither the Unitarian view nor the Relativist view are completely correct. The suggestion that Ethical Egoism is the foundation within all humans suggest that only one individual’s perspective is the definition of selfish while relativist determine what is the basis for right and wrong situations of other people. Both relativist theory and Unitarian theory don’t respect...
Words: 1698 - Pages: 7
...Cody Gut Dr. T. Nulty Philosophy 215 Introduction to Ethics April 12, 2012 Infanticide of Disabled Newborns Infanticide of a disabled newborn is the killing of a newborn baby who has been diagnosed with a disability. With the new technology that has been discovered in recent years newborns with disabilities can be kept alive through extraordinary lifesaving techniques. An example of this is newborns born with chronic cardiopulmonary disease which, “…is a disease that affects the normal functions of the heart and lungs that could disturb the complete physical, mental and social well being of individual”. (Violeta) Newborns born with this would not survive more then a few days without the extreme help of doctors and machines to keep the baby alive. Now what could happen is the newborn could be left alone and would die but not before sufficient suffering. Or the baby could be kept alive with machines that the doctors have, but the baby would also suffer and only be kept alive because of the machines. The third option is the baby could be killed quickly and painlessly, which would relieve suffering. The ethical issues that are involved in this case that are brought up by people are. 1. Nobody has the right to decide whether ones life is worth less than another’s. Thus meaning that one person cannot decide whether someone should live or die. 2. Everyone should be given a fighting chance to live. This means that maybe something miraculous happens and the baby pulls...
Words: 1334 - Pages: 6
...for missing the transcendent meaning of love and instead caring for one another just because we feel like it". The ideas behind relativism may be misleading or confusing to some, but are essential to any worldview, including the pope's. Pope Benedict worries that a person's individual autonomy has been lifted and valued above moral absolutes. Most people understand that lying is wrong and considered unethical, but we also take a stand that lying in order to prevent harm or evil can be justified. Just because lying is accepted in that situation does not make it ok to lie, in the same way that self defense does not make it ok to do harm unto others in any other situation than when a person feels their life is being threatened. These are relativist views because there is no absolute. There...
Words: 1323 - Pages: 6
...Achebe’s novel says, “What is good in one place is bad in another.”[2] The quote suggests that the Ibo people’s view was that of ethical relativism. This suggests that they know other cultures may view their beliefs as bad or unmoral, and they accepted this. This also suggest that the Ibo people accepted the cultural relativist view that good and bad differ from one cultural groups to another. Ethical relativism is the doctrine that there are no absolute truths in ethics and that what is morally right or wrong varies from person to person or from society to society. Ethical relativism means that there are no set ways of life. Every person has their own set of beliefs that differ from another person, even within the same society. I believe to fully believe in ethical relativism that there would have to be no judgment placed on people or societies. I do not believe that this could be accomplished, no matter how open-minded one thinks they are. We all judge others, even without realizing we do it, so I am not sure that there can be true relativist. Based on what some of the Ibo people say in the novel, I do not believe that I can say that the entire clan was not ethical relativists. I can say that Okonkwo was not an...
Words: 1526 - Pages: 7
...a) Explain the differences between absolute and relative morality. (25) To start, it is necessary to define the terms 'absolute' and 'relative' with reference to morality. Absolute means any theory in which the rules are absolute: they are unchanging and universal. Relative means any theory in which something is judged in relation to something else and is therefore open to change. Absolute laws or rules of morality will never change. Another way of putting this is that they are objective. Objective means that I am not bringing in any personal opinions or bias, so the rules that I work out are rules that anybody else would rationally come up with. We may come to work out these rules by use of reason and so any rational human being would be able to use his/her reason to come up with the same set of rules. For example, I may, using reason, work out that it is wrong to lie. An absolutist would think that it is therefore always wrong to lie, in any situation and in any culture. So it is just as wrong for me to lie about cheating on my boyfriend as it is to lie about the fact that Santa isn't real. And I can never think it is right to lie, even, to use Kant's famous example, if there was a murder at my door enquiring as to the whereabouts of my friend. If I knew my friend was hiding in my house, I would have to tell this to the murderer. In this situation, Kant would say that if I had lied to the murdered, and then in some strange coincidence my friend had left my house and was...
Words: 1932 - Pages: 8
...a) Explain the differences between absolute and relative morality. (25) To start, it is necessary to define the terms 'absolute' and 'relative' with reference to morality. Absolute means any theory in which the rules are absolute: they are unchanging and universal. Relative means any theory in which something is judged in relation to something else and is therefore open to change. Absolute laws or rules of morality will never change. Another way of putting this is that they are objective. Objective means that I am not bringing in any personal opinions or bias, so the rules that I work out are rules that anybody else would rationally come up with. We may come to work out these rules by use of reason and so any rational human being would be able to use his/her reason to come up with the same set of rules. For example, I may, using reason, work out that it is wrong to lie. An absolutist would think that it is therefore always wrong to lie, in any situation and in any culture. So it is just as wrong for me to lie about cheating on my boyfriend as it is to lie about the fact that Santa isn't real. And I can never think it is right to lie, even, to use Kant's famous example, if there was a murder at my door enquiring as to the whereabouts of my friend. If I knew my friend was hiding in my house, I would have to tell this to the murderer. In this situation, Kant would say that if I had lied to the murdered, and then in some strange coincidence my friend had left my house and was met...
Words: 1932 - Pages: 8
...Along with demonstrating culture relativism is Saddam Hussein an example of ethical subjectivism? Why or why not? 2. If a cultural relativist lived in a culture that deemed ethnic cleansing and genocide morally unacceptable. For that cultural relativist would it be morally acceptable to intervene in a case where another culture was actively engaging in ethnic cleansing and genocide and use what your culture deemed immoral to stop such acts? Alternatively, would it be more morally acceptable not to intervene because each culture has its morals even though they go against yours? If they did intervene would they be oppressing the other culture because they are pushing their cultural morals on another culture? 3. When the Allied powers were drafting the treaty that dispersed the Kurds into different countries, do you think culture relativism played a part in the language of the treaty? Why or why not? 4. If Saddam Hussein was a culture relativist how would he respond to Adolf Hitler and the...
Words: 797 - Pages: 4
...and reasoning. For example, some people may take the position of a deontologist who would argue that it is our moral duty to support and sustain life therefore assisted suicide should not be allowed. Unfortunately, this very emotional thought provoking debate is not a “black and white issue,” as most ethical arguments are not. In the situation of physician-assisted death, I disagree with the deontologist point of view that it is immoral for a physician to assist a patient in suicide. I believe as some relativist due, that as long as the patient is fully capable of making this decision and the patient is in a constant state of agony, then the patient has the right to make the choice to live or die. A relativist believes that morals are only relative to that particular society and if physician assisted, death was considered moral in that group then it would be considered a moral act. Neither theory is without flaws as some deontologist even share my point of view and some relativist can be extreme in what they...
Words: 2594 - Pages: 11
