Argument Against Moral Relativism

1570 Words4 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Limitation or challenges of deontology

Argument against moral relativism

This paper will debate advantages and disadvantages of both moral relativism and deontology. I will argue against moral relativism by showing that deontology gives a better account of our moral intuitions than moral relativism. I will use examples from the film The Ballad of Narayam, and James Rachels’ “The Challenge of Cultural Relativism” to illustrate why moral relativism should be rejected, and deontology should be accepted.

Moral Relativism

Moral relativism takes the position that moral and/or ethical propositions do not reflect universal moral standards. Moreover, moral relativism takes the position that moral truths reflect those of social, cultural, and historical circumstances. It is a sociological fact that different societies have different sets of moral rules. Moral relativism is a theoretical view of morality, which states that right and wrong are always relative to a particular culture. For example, moral rules of a specific culture determines that there is no meaning to the words “right” or “wrong” other than what the culture dictates as “right” or “wrong”. Moral relativism is unique, such that people’s beliefs about right and wrong are relative to their social conditioning, that is, what people determine as truly or morally right depends on what the individual, or society believes to be right. Moral relativism is not absolute, meaning ethical truths depend on variables such as culture, social, or historical circumstances. Thus, a moral realist must even admit truth in the sociological fact that different societies have different sets of moral rules, however, a moral realist must deny that “right” and “wrong” are always determined by what the culture dictates as “right” or “wr...

... middle of paper ...

...ause of old age. For that matter, one could argue that children are a burden on their parents, or even take it to a larger level and say that mentally ill, handicapped, or temporarily ill individuals are a burden and should be discarded. Cultures, societies, and beliefs are constantly changing, and thus, there needs to be a universal law that determines codes of ethics and morals.

Deontology provides such an answer. Deontology uses reason, logic, and the categorical imperative to determine what is ethically and morally right. It allows for a universal code to be established, so that changes among cultures, societies, and countries do not impede laws of ethics and morals. Ethics of morals are universal truths. They should not be dependent o the current societal whim. Deontology, unlike moral relativism, focuses on reason and logic, and recognizes universal truths.

Show More
Related

  • Ethical Relativism In Martin Luther King's Letter From Birmingham Jail

    623 Words  | 2 Pages

    Ethical relativism is a perspective that emphasizes on people's different standards of evaluating acts as good or bad. These standard beliefs are true in their particular society or circumstances, and the beliefs are not necessarily example of a basic moral values. Ethical relativism also takes a position that there are no moral right and wrongs. Right and wrongs are justified based on the particular social norms. Martin Luther King's moral critique against racial injustice is reliable with the idea of ethical relativism. Dr. King took a moral judgment that institutionalized racism is unacceptable in America about the nature of ethical truth. King's moral views about the discrimination of blacks in the United States were inappropriate. His

    Read More

  • Ethical Relativism By Louis Pojman

    1071 Words  | 3 Pages

    Many seem to have falling prey to the seduction of ethical relativism, because it plays in to their ethnocentric egoistic moral belief. Individuals such as Pojman are able to critically evaluate this moral principle and not fall victim like his or hers lay counter parts. We will attempt to analyze the theory of ethical relativism, by check the validity of this ethical theory, and evaluate its ethical concepts. With these procedures we will find if it is competent as an ethical principle to adhere by. Then evaluate Louis Pojman critique on ethical relativism and analyze does he successfully refute relativism position. We will also analyze objectivism; the ethical theory which Pojman erects in the place of ethical relativism.

    Read More

  • The Case Against Moral Relativism

    278 Words  | 1 Pages

    "Who's to judge who's right or wrong?" In the case against moral relativism Pojman provides an analysis of Relativism. His analysis includes an interpretation of Relativism that states the following ideas: Actions vary from society to society, individuals behavior depends on the society they belong to, and there are no standards of living that apply to all human kind. An example that demonstrates these ideas is people around the world eat beef (cows) and in India, cows are not to be eaten. From Pojman second analysis an example can be how the Japanese take of their shoes all the time before entering the house. In Mexico it is rare that people take off their shoes. They might find it wired or not normal. In his third analysis he gives that sense moral relativism and cultural relativism are tied together, that their can be no

    Read More

  • Martin Luther King Utilitarianism Essay

    2007 Words  | 5 Pages

    In its entirety, moral relativism is comprised of the belief that, as members of various and countless cultures, we cannot judge each other’s morality. If this theory stands true, then “we have no basis for judging other cultures or values,” according to Professor McCombs’ Ethics 2. Our moral theories cannot extend throughout cultures, as we do not all share similar values. For instance, the Catholic tradition believes in the sacrament of Reconciliation. This sacrament holds that confessing one’s sins to a priest and

    Read More

  • Cultural Relativism: An Impediment to Critical Morality

    1079 Words  | 3 Pages

    Cultural Relativism is a moral theory which states that due to the vastly differing cultural norms held by people across the globe, morality cannot be judged objectively, and must instead be judged subjectively through the lense of an individuals own cultural norms. Because it is obvious that there are many different beliefs that are held by people around the world, cultural relativism can easily be seen as answer to the question of how to accurately and fairly judge the cultural morality of others, by not doing so at all. However Cultural Relativism is a lazy way to avoid the difficult task of evaluating one’s own values and weighing them against the values of other cultures. Many Cultural Relativist might abstain from making moral judgments about other cultures based on an assumed lack of understanding of other cultures, but I would argue that they do no favors to the cultures of others by assuming them to be so firmly ‘other’ that they would be unable to comprehend their moral decisions. Cultural Relativism as a moral theory fails to allow for critical thoughts on the nature of morality and encourages the stagnation

    Read More

  • The Pros And Cons Of The Divine Command Theory

    1099 Words  | 3 Pages

    Cultural Relativism and the Divine Command Theory both had a tough time explaining why culture and God had the rights to state what is considered moral behavior. Especially when you lay your trust on God to guide you on what is moral or not, you face dangerous risks because there is a possibility that God is just a make-believe person up in the sky. Hence, humans who follow God’s words can misinterpret his meanings and cause immoral behavior in society. On the other hand, Ethical Relativism appeals to an authority that is present on this in this world, society and cultures. Nevertheless, society and cultures should not be relied on to indicate moral and immoral behavior because it is questionable to believe that our actions become moral just for the reason that our culture or society accepts them as normal. Despite the differences between The Divine Command Theory and Cultural Relativism, they both are theories that just fall short of their

    Read More

  • Thesis Statement On Moral Relativism

    1003 Words  | 3 Pages

    Moral relativism is the concept that people’s moral judgement can only goes as far a one person’s standpoint in a matter. Also, one person’s view on a particular subject carries no extra weight than another person. What I hope to prove in my thesis statement are inner judgements, moral disagreements, and science are what defend and define moral relativism.

    Read More

  • Summary Of Moral Relativism By Gilbert Harman

    1800 Words  | 4 Pages

    Gilbert Harman lays out his moral relativism theory with “inner judgments”, the statements concerned with “ought”, in Moral Relativism Defended. However, he assumes an important premise of his theory to be true, which is the reason that I will prove the missing premise – that moral relativism is true – in this paper. Moreover, his form of moral relativism with his “four-place predicate ‘Ought(A,D,C,M),’ which relates an agent A, a type of action D, considerations C, and motivating attitudes M,” has brought about both meta-ethical and practical concerns. He argues that these inner judgments are only possible if agent A acknowledges considerations of the circumstance C, invokes motivating attitudes M, and supports the action D with C and M. In

    Read More

  • Ethical Relativism: Why Are Moral Truths?

    813 Words  | 2 Pages

    This is simply morality strictly based on opinion. There are two types of ethical relativism: conventionalism and subjectivism. Conventionalism is morality relative to social opinions, while subjectivism is morality relative to an individual’s opinion. These two forms of ethical relativism essentially are the same. We base the majority of our opinions around what the rest of our society believes. And we base our societal opinions on what most individuals believe. In this way, they are intertwined and influence each other. We can see in some cultures, like in China, that people take care of their elderly family members and live with them up until their death. And to deny your elders from living with you would be completely disrespectful and for our purposes, could be considered the wrong or immoral. But in other cultures like the United States, we do not do this. Typically we only live with our spouse and children. Very few people in the United States would say it was immoral to live without their elders, but instead put them in a retirement home. This is just one example of how morals are different in different cultures. Relativists would say that every culture has its own morals of which, many

    Read More

  • Difference Between Relativism And Moral Objectivism

    1394 Words  | 3 Pages

    In the attempt to explain morality, two prominent theories exist- moral relativism and moral objectivism. Morality in a sense is difficult to explain, both theories attempt to shed a bit of light in way to break down its complexity. Moral Relativism argues in the view that morality exists only due to the fact that it is relative, or in respect to, cultural or individual beliefs. In a sense, it is up to the people to determine what is right and wrong. On the other hand, moral objectivism views that morality is not parallel, or relative, to one 's beliefs. That it is independent and not subjective to one 's interpretations, thus it is objective and universal moral facts exist. Louis. P. Pojman, an American philosopher and professor,

    Read More

  • Moral Relativism

    1958 Words  | 4 Pages

    Moral relativism, as Harman describes, denies “that there are universal basic moral demands, and says different people are subject to different basic moral demands depending on the social customs, practices, conventions, and principles that they accept” (Harman, p. 85). Many suppose that moral feelings derive from sympathy and concern for others, but Harman rather believes that morality derives from agreement among people of varying powers and resources provides a more plausible explanation (Harman, p. 12).The survival of these values and morals is based on Darwin’s natural selection survival of the fittest theory. Many philosophers have argued for and against what moral relativism would do for the world. In this essay, we will discuss exactly what moral relativism entails, the consequences of taking it seriously, and finally the benefits if the theory were implemented.

    Read More

  • Ethical Relativism and Cultural Relativism

    714 Words  | 2 Pages

    In explaining Cultural Relativism, it is useful to compare and contrast it with Ethical Relativism. Cultural Relativism is a theory about morality focused on the concept that matters of custom and ethics are not universal in nature but rather are culture specific. Each culture evolves its own unique moral code, separate and apart from any other. Ethical Relativism is also a theory of morality with a view of ethics similarly engaged in understanding how morality comes to be culturally defined. However, the formulation is quite different in that from a wide range of human habits, individual opinions drive the culture toward distinguishing normal “good” habits from abnormal “bad” habits.

    Read More

  • The Argument Of Cultural Relativism

    1167 Words  | 3 Pages

    The world contains a great numbers of different cultures that vary from different countries. Sometimes we found other culture interesting or hard to understand. I believe that moral relativism is a unilateral argument that people who consider this standpoint ignore the fact that there are universal standard and the moral progress happen in the society. Based on culture relativism, there is no definitely right or wrong moral standards which they all depend on different culture or different person.

    Read More

  • Cultural Differences: An Example Of Cultural Relativism?

    1275 Words  | 3 Pages

    Cultural Relativism is the theory that ethical and moral standards are based on what a particular society deems to be good or bad. Since different societies have different beliefs, cultural relativists believe there are many moral codes in the world. Cultural relativists believe there is no universal moral code, which is an independent standard that defines what is right or wrong all of the time, regardless of place.

    Read More

  • Justification Of Morality Essay

    4808 Words  | 10 Pages

    1. Introduction In this paper I wish to consider the following related questions: (i) Can a system of morality be justified?; (ii) Why should one act morally?; (iii) How can others be persuaded to act morally? Clearly none of these questions is new, and moral philosophers have proposed a variety of responses to them over the centuries without reaching any general agreement. Nevertheless, because these questions are fundamental to any practical application of moral theory, it is worthwhile to continue to reflect upon them. For Jewish, Christian and Muslim societies, the justification of morality is the Word of God as expressed in the Bible and Koran. Given an authoritative text containing basic moral premises, the appropriate method for obtaining rules of conduct is a process of logical deduction from those premises to conclusions. However, if we focus our inquiry on European and American societies in the present century, the decline of belief in religious authority has undermined this approach to moral theory for many people. This monumental change-for morality-may be attributed to many factors. An increase in multicultural studies has emphasized the wide variety of beliefs that human beings hold, which may have led more people to doubt that any one of them is authoritative. A number of writers over the years have commented on the correspondence of specific religious beliefs with one's society of birth, again leading thoughtful individuals to question the authority of their childhood religious beliefs. As a general sociological observation, one can point to a positive correlation between increasing educational level and a diminished belief in the authority of religious texts. When thoughtful persons reject religious authority as the basis of morality, it becomes necessary to find another basis for moral beliefs. One of the few statements about contemporary moral philosophy which is unlikely to encounter opposition is that no moral theory enjoys wide acceptance. At present the most widely discussed theories of morality in the British-American literature are utilitarianism, deontology and social contract theory. The well known utilitarian approach to ethical (note 1) decision making was proposed by Jeremy Bentham in his Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation (1789) and elaborated by John Stuart Mill in several books, e.g., Utilitarianism (1863). In Chapter 1, Bentham defines utility as that which "tends to produce benefit, advantage, pleasure, good, or happiness (all this in the present case comes to the same thing)".

    Read More

More about Argument Against Moral Relativism

Open Document