One relativistic belief that I find that some people hold is regarding abortion. Some people say, “Well, I would never have one,” implying that there is something immoral or unjustified about the action (at least in their case), and then they will follow that up with a statement like, “But I don’t think other people should be denied the right to have one,” suggesting that there is in fact nothing immoral or unjustifiable about it. This appears to me to be a case of, “What’s not good for me is not necessarily bad for you.” While some philosophers, like Kant, might argue that relativism is part of understanding how morality must be viewed in individual cases, other philosophers will suggest that just as there is a subjective side to judgment there is also an objective side to judgment and that some actions can be judged objectively as immoral, even if subjectively the action may not be immoral (Fishman & McCarthy, 2013). So in this sense, relativism is like a thread that runs through all thinking about ethics and morality.As Goodman (2010) points out, relativism is not even necessarily the right way to think about conflicts in how we view the morality of actions....
Context is actually more appropriate, and putting things into the right context can help people to better understand if one is being contradictory or rather if one is being discriminating. For example, Goodman (2010) states that “murder is wrong because it destroys a human subject. Warfare is not always wrong; it may be necessary to protect such subjects” (p. 88). This type of contextualization is important, especially since, as Midgely (1981) notes, moral judgment “is a human necessity” (p. 160). It is important to make moral judgments rather than to simply shrug them off with an attitude of relativism that bespeaks more to a disinterest in the issue than it does to a commitment to moral understanding. Rachels (1999) states that relativism “is not so plausible as it first appears to be” primarily because the conclusions reached in relativistic arguments do not follow from the premises presented—and, thus, they are not logical (p. 17).
Moral Realism vs. Moral Relativism Philosophers have argued the merits or existence of moral realism and moral relativism for some time. Generally, the argument is designed as an either or proposition, where only one argument can be true. This is not necessarily true when one takes the time to explore what is meant by moral realism vs. moral relativism (Streitfeld). Essentially, moral realism is an objective view while moral realism is
Then morality is relative, not absolute (Kreeft) Weaknesses One weakness of moral relativism consists of the consequences of not having moral constraints (Kreeft 2003). Correct or good morality, if valid, should always have good consequences. Incorrect or bad morality should always have bad consequences. The fact is that all wrong or immoral acts and attitudes bring on "good" or pleasant feelings. Moral relativism has never produced people worthy of praise. It
Rule-breakers received swift punishment. Deviation from the norm was not tolerated by law or by social convention. Just because a moral standard helps create a stable society does not mean that moral standard is just, good, or right. Finally, the use of coercion itself denotes an unnatural moral standard. It takes relatively little coercion to ensure that most people don't murder or steal. Most children internalize the types of
Pollack. There has to be a time when people are willing to stand for what is right and in their beliefs. Unfortunately, time has proven that great losses come from standing behind a belief system or truth that is not held by all individuals involved. Conclusively, one would feel that punishment and lose is the payment for stepping out of the box, and pointing out errors, indiscretions etc. The
Moral Community: A group in America that is clearly being marginalized politically and socially is the community of undocumented immigrants. An estimated 11.1 million immigrants are living and working in the United States, and notwithstanding that the U.S. Senate and the executive branch have passed a bill allowing undocumented immigrants a path to citizenship, the Republicans resist supporting this legislation. Cultural relativism helps to understand why 11.1 million people are
Moral Good and Moral Value Determining moral "good" is a fundamental philosophical study. Only the lazy philosopher would revert to codes of ethics. Ethical standards come from somewhere, and generally those standards can be grouped into three main categories of analysis: consequentialism, deontological ethics, and virtue or character ethics. While these three modes of thinking about the moral good can sometimes interact with one another to create more complex moral analyses,
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now