Absolutists believe what is “right” is always right and what is “wrong” is always wrong; however, relativists accept that what is right or wrong is considered right or wrong depending on the individuals, groups, societies or cultures. Based on relativism’s view, “those acts approved of by society are good; those that are socially frowned on being bad” (Shafer-Landau, 2010, p. 183). They think we should not judge a society that favors the raping of young girls or women. If such action is socially approved in that particular society, it is a good thing (Shafer-Landau, 2010, p. 183). Even if a widely supported norm will be catastrophic to a society, it is the appropriate thing to do if it is socially accepted. For instance, if a military troop …show more content…
Since speeding on the Autobahn is authorized by the German government, relativists accept that driving fast on the Autobahn is the right thing to do even if people’s lives are at risks. Based on relativism’s philosophy, it becomes apparent that if the government decides to seize certain groups of people’s land or properties and leaves them on the streets, it is morally right as long as it is socially approved by the majority of people who are not part of that group. Also, they believe the abusing of animals are the appropriate way to act if a particular society approved it. That particular society should not be judged according to relativism. Relativists admit that, not correcting or spanking a child who is causing trouble in society is morally right if a group or a culture finds it not problematic. Though the relativistic view can be beneficial in positive actions that are regarded as right in most societies, it is totally confusing …show more content…
Those who believe in the existence of God, would definitely accept that actions should be judged using the Ten Commandments. Most of the human rules are adopted using the Ten Commandments. It is essential that actions should be judged using such Moral Law. If we are the creature of God, he created us with feelings, emotions and the ability to reason and gave us the Ten Commandments to make ethical judgments. They work intimately as one and can’t work without each other. God is an omnipotent being who sees, knows and understands everything. Those who have always questioned his Ten Commandments are those who consistently deny his existence. One of the Ten Commandments has said that we should not kill. We find that most societies agree with it though some people always violate such commandment. In reality, it is wrong to kill no matter what the situation (McGowan, 2016, p. 7). We should not steal is another God’s rule that most institutions, societies, and cultures recognize as a wrong action, even though most of us break it all the time. The Ten Commandments is fixed. We can’t live or function without God’s rule or the law. Trying to change or breaking them, will make us face the
In the article “God and Morality” by Caroline Wilkerson, Wilkerson questions whether or not one’s ethics are independent of religion, pondering if it is just a man man-made concept focused on goals like survival and reproduction. Wilkerson attempts to explain that the moral codes that a particular religious god encourages others to follow may be in fact “arbitrary” based on her reading of Plato’s dialog Euthyphro. In the end, she concludes by saying that even though a god’s moral code may be “erratic,” it is better to follow their moral code rather than following what society considers to be
Our moral beliefs indicate the kind of environment or culture we grew up in. Therefore, if we were born in Somalia, we would believe that it is morally right to go through female circumcision as a rite of passage. However, if we grew up in the western world, then we would not believe in female circumcision. We can therefore see the relativist 's argument of cultural relativism in this case, because if cultural relativism exists, then naturally, morality will also be relative. Additionally, to support his stance, the relativist will also argue that tolerance comes into play when it comes to cultural relativism.
The Ten Commandments stated: to have no gods before the one true God, to not worship idols, to not take the Lord’s name in vain, to honor the Sabbath, to honor your father and mother, to not kill, to not commit adultery, to not steal, to not bear false witness against your neighbor, and to not covet your neighbor’s wife or goods. When Moses came down from the mountain, he saw the Israelites worshiping a golden calf and became so angry that he broke the tablets the Commandments were on. God gave him new tablets later
In this prompt the argument that Morality exists is irrelevant, contrary to our thoughts and beliefs. Everyone follows a set of moral rules. Ethical relativists disagree with this belief because, they believe that morals are distinctive from each individual culture. These relativists as described are mixing up moral and cultural distinctions, or are simply not willing to completely understanding the cultures they are standing up for. There are two different types of relativism Ethical, and Cultural, that rely upon the argument of cultural differences, which have flaws that make the argument unsound.
Philosophy 2200C Taylor Pearl Paper #1 The Cultural Differences Argument for Moral Relativism In this paper I will be discussing the theory of the Cultural Differences Argument for Moral Relativism and also the flaws this theory holds. First I will explain the general idea of Moral Relativism, followed by two examples of cultural differences that are often cited to further explain this theory. After that I will discuss what the Cultural Differences Argument is for Moral Relativism.
The 10 commandments are a set of principles given from God that all Catholics are instructed to follow in order to live an acceptable life. They dictate that Catholics should not steal, kill or lie, among several other things. These rules instruct Catholics on how to live a life that is fit in God’s eyes. Among these commandments, The most important comes from Matthew where Jesus tells Catholics that “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy
This is because of moral relativism’s take on ethical dilemmas, and the view that there are a number of disagreements among people as to the nature of morality. An act can
56–63. Accessed 1. Baghramian, Maria and Carter, J. Adam, "Relativism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2017 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = (-- removed HTML --) . 2.
Every society has its own unique cultures in which people will have different ideas of moral codes. The diversity of these cultures cannot be said to be correct or incorrect. Every society has independent standards of ethic within their society and these standards are culture-bound. Cultural Relativism has a perception in which rightness or wrongness of an action depends entirely within the bounds of the culture. This theory opposes the belief in the objectivity of moral truth.
God is the Creator and man is the created, and owing to this, God is the Law Giver and man must obey the laws given to him by the Creator. There is no one who is free to disobey the instructions of their
The debate over whether the ends justify the means stands greatly at an impasse for many people. The Bible, historical events, and many stories however have all pointed to the fact that the ends rather, do not justify the means. While this topic is widely based on situational ethics, you must still assess each situation carefully, realizing that there are absolute truths that you cannot defy because you believe you will end up at a good end. In Exodus 20 when God gave the Israelites the Ten Commandments, they were self-explanatory, straightforward instructions that are meant to govern the way we live.
In other words, “right” or “wrong” are culture specific, what is considered moral in one society may be considered immoral in another, and, since no universal standard of morality that exist, no one has the right to judge another societies custom (Ess, 2009). Cultural Relativism is closely related to ethical relativism, which views truth as variable and not absolute. What makes up right and wrong is determined solely by individual or the society (Ess, 2009). Since the truth is not object, there can be no standards which applies to all cultures.
While each strain of Judaism may have slightly different beliefs and thoughts on the Ten Commandments, overall they all hold true the same general ideas. One of these ideas is the belief of an afterlife. Jewish people believe that one must work hard in their current life so that they can have a good afterlife. For this reason, the Laws are very important because they will guide people to heaven. Another significant purpose of the Commandments is that they “reveal the holiness of God” (1Peter 1:15-16).
The Strength and Vulnerability of Different Moral Views Over centuries of fervent discussion in the moral world, there is still nothing like a consensus on a set of moral views. This essay attempts to outline and critically evaluate two moral views, namely ethical objectivism and cultural relativism. It is crucial to understand that both moral theories cannot be true at the same time as it results in contradictions, contributing to false beliefs. Additionally, it is essential that we discuss these issues with an open-mind so as to gain deeper insights from them. First and foremost, we will be looking at the prominent view of ethical objectivism.
The commandments do not only consider the relationship between God and the readers but also the other members of society, obeying the law code guarantees a society that is free of wars and other occurrences that may hurt unity within the society (Tov, 2004). The Torah indicates punishments that the disobedient individuals face but the author did not consider the changing times. During the time, the punishments applied to the society because the economic, political, and social aspects of the society differed greatly from the modern society. The legal system that operated at the time was mainly based on the Mosaic laws, but the modern legal system is different due the evolution of technological, political, and social factors. The author did not consider the possibility of having a legal system that was not based on theocratic laws.