The Characteristics Of Louis Pojman's Theory Of Ethical Relativism

1436 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Problems associated with ethical relativism

Many seem to have fallen prey to the seduction of ethical relativism, because it plays into 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 counterparts. 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 of 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. However, …show more content…

The first is Prescriptivity; this trait is the ability to guide actions, nature of morality. This trait is used to assign praise and blame. Also, are used to provide feelings contentment and guilt (Fieser 7). Some of these principles are generally put forth as commands or imperatives (Fieser 7). Many may know this as, do not kill, do no unnecessary harm, and love your neighbor (Fieser 7). Most people and religions use these to advise others and influence actions (Fieser 7). A great example of prescriptivity is the Ten Commandments, this puts forth a list of permissible and impermissible actions. The next is universalizability: “moral principles must apply to all people who are in a relevantly similar situations” (Fieser 7). This trait would best be manifested in the Golden Rule, “Do to others what you would want them to do to you” (Fieser 7). “We also see it in the formal principle of justice: It cannot be right for A to treat B in a manner in which it would be wrong for B to treat A, merely on the ground that they are two different individuals”(Fieser 7). After is overridingness: this is the trait that holds that a moral principle must supersede aesthetic and prudential and legal one (Fieser 7). For example, a moral principle like thou

Show More
Related

  • Amputees By Choice Summary

    1306 Words  | 3 Pages

    Throughout this paper I will examine three different ethical views and interpret the ways in which one would respond to the scenario at hand. The initial ethical view is composed of cultural relativism. Another view is Kantian ethics. The final view involves utilitarianism. When presenting these views, I will describe each ethical view, and also I will speak abouts how a person who abides by the given ethical view would respond to the situation.

    Read More

  • Ethical Relativism By Louis Pojman

    1071 Words  | 3 Pages

    The first is Prescriptivity; this trait is the ability to guide actions, nature of morality. This trait is used to assign praise and blame. Also, are used to provide feelings contentment and guilt (Fieser 7). Some of these principle are generally put forth as commands or imperatives (Fieser 7). Many may know this as, do not kill, do no unnecessary harm, and love you neighbor (Fieser 7). Most people and religions use these to advise others and influence actions (Fieser 7). A great example of prescriptivity is the Ten Commandments, this puts forth a list of permisble and umpermisible actions. The next is universalizability: “moral principles must apply to all people who are in a relevantly similar situations” (Fieser 7). This trait would best be manifested in the Golden Rule, “Do to others what you would want them to do to you” (Fieser 7). “We also see it in the formal principle of justice: It cannot be right for A to treat B in a manner in which it would be wrong for B to treat A, merely on the ground that they are two different individuals”(Fieser 7). After is overridingness: this is trait that holds that a moral principle must supersede aesthetic and prudential and legal one (Fieser 7). For example, a moral principle like thou

    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

  • Lewis Vaughn's Definition Of Ethics And Morality

    1159 Words  | 3 Pages

    Morality is, in many ways, a thorn in philosophy’s foot, struggling to abide by the standard of intellectual rigor typically held in the philosophical tradition. This is not particularly surprising. There is a high emotional and personal investment placed in morality and as such, even great minds can falter in their logical demands of morality. The issue of objectivism in ethics is particularly problematic. Lewis Vaughn’s arguments against ethical relativism in Bioethics show the difficulty of dismissing said theory’s possibility, all the while failing to provide his own evidence on behalf of ethical objectivism.

    Read More

  • A Discussion to Compare Moral Theories

    707 Words  | 2 Pages

    A discussion of moral theories must begin with a discussion of the two extremes of ethical thinking, absolutism and relativism. Moral Absolutism is the belief that there are absolute standards where moral questions are judged and can be deemed right or wrong, regardless of the context. Steadfast laws of the universe, God, nature itself are the forces that deem an action right or wrong. A person’s actions rather than morals and motivations are important in an Absolutism proposition. Moral Relativism states, that the moral propositions are based on Ethical relativism is the theory that holds that morality is relative to the norms of one's culture. That is, whether an action is right or wrong depends on the moral norms of the society in which it is practiced. The same action may be morally right in one society but be morally wrong in another. For the ethical relativist, there are no universal moral standards that apply to all peoples at all times. Ethical relativism is the theory that holds that morality is relative to the norms of one's culture. That is, whether an action is right or wrong depends on the moral norms of the society in which it is practiced. The same action may be morally right in one society but be morally wrong in another. For the ethical relativist, there are no universal moral standards -- standards that can be applied to all peoples at all times. Culture and personal morals cause a person to make certain moral decisions.

    Read More

  • Analysis Of Moral Relativism

    1083 Words  | 3 Pages

    Moral relativism maintains that objective moral truth does not exist, and there need not be any contradiction in saying a single action is both moral and immoral depending on the relative vantage point of the judge. Moral relativism, by denying the existence of any absolute moral truths, both allows for differing moral opinions to exist and withholds assent to any moral position even if universally or nearly universally shared. Strictly speaking, moral relativism and only evaluates an action’s moral worth in the context of a particular group or perspective. The basic logical formulation for the moral relativist position states that different societies have empirically different moral codes that govern each respective society, and because there does not exist an objective moral standard of judgment, no society’s moral code possesses any special status or maintains any moral superiority over any other society’s moral code. The moral relativist concludes that cultures cannot evaluate or criticize other cultural perspectives in the absence of any objective standard of morality, essentially leveling all moral systems and limiting their scope to within a given society.

    Read More

  • Theories Of Moral Relativism

    1517 Words  | 4 Pages

    Moral relativism has two conceptualized frameworks that describe statements. These are Cognitivism and Non-Cognitivism. Cognitivism in a nutshell is merely the opposite of non-cognitivism. Relatively, it is the certainty that moral statements do express beliefs and that they are apt for truth and falsity. Moral judgments generally dwell in this arena due to the element that people incline to make moral judgments a large part in their decision-making and anything which is non-existent in moral values tends to be discarded. The spectrum that Cognitivism belongs to is so broad that it encompasses the milieus of moral realism, moral subjectivism and error theory. Hillary Putnam in his book, Ethics without ontology states that ethical (including mathematical) sentences can be factual and unprejudiced

    Read More

  • Universal Theory Of Ethical Relativism

    750 Words  | 2 Pages

    In the paper I will discuss how ethics is or is not related to one’s culture or personal beliefs. I will also touch base on relativism as a universal theory and what that means.

    Read More

  • The Ethics Of Relativism

    771 Words  | 2 Pages

    Ethics are not universal throughout the world due to the many different persons and cultures that have different moral beliefs and ethics. However, within an area where the culture is similar and the majority of the people in society believe in the same morals and beliefs, all of their ethics can be said to be relative. Rather than believing if an action is good or bad, morals from different cultures and settings are viewed as being either accepted or not accepted. As long as an action is viewed as being accepted then that is a moral of that culture. An example of a moral being accepted in a culture when other cultures do not accept it is killing. There are some cultures that believe in the concept of suicide and/or homicide, while other

    Read More

  • Analysis Of Louis Pojman's World View

    162 Words  | 1 Pages

    Whereas, Louis PoJman’s world view explanation goes as follows; firstly, he believes that through theism, we as humans have a satisfying explanations of the origins of the universe. He said this by conveying the fact that through religion we have a creation story, which helps us to validate our existence as well as give us comfort in knowing that we as humans were created for a purpose. And this purpose is to live our lives serving God.

    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

  • Moral Objectivism Vs Moral Relativism

    1352 Words  | 3 Pages

    In ones adolescent years, an important figure or role model taught the values of morality, the importance between right and wrong and the qualities of good versus bad. As the years, decades, and centuries have passed by, the culture of morality and the principles that humankind lives by have shifted and changed over time. In the article, “Folk Moral Relativism”, the authors, Hagop Sarkissian, John Park, David Tien, Jennifer Cole Wright and Joshua Knobe discuss six different studies to support their new hypothesis. However, in order to understand this essay, one must comprehend the difference between moral objectivism and moral relativism, which is based on whether or not the view of what someone else believes in, is morally correct or incorrect. For instance, moral objectivism is not centered on a person’s beliefs of what is considered right and wrong, but instead, is founded on moral facts.

    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

More about The Characteristics Of Louis Pojman's Theory Of Ethical Relativism

Open Document