Moral Absolutism Is Wrong

Moral Absolutism is the ethical belief that there are absolute standards against which moral questions can be judged, and that certain actions are right or wrong, regardless of the context of the act. Thus, actions are inherently moral or immoral, regardless of the beliefs and goals of the individual, society or culture that engages in the actions. It holds that morals are inherent in the laws of the universe, the nature of humanity, the will of God or some other fundamental source (Philosophy Basics n.d.) While is believe that there are certain actions that are right or wrong, I do not believe that it is regardless of the context of the act. It is wrong to kill, but how do you tell me that I am wrong if I kill a man n self defines because he is attempting to rape me. Moral absolutism leaves no room for logical reasoning.

Moral Relativism on the other hand says that moral propositions do not reflect objective and/or

(Wikipedia n.d.). Much of what we believe had been passed down to us by our parents and our society. Usually the man who stands out in his society is shunned and looked down upon. We are taught that when we are in Rome we should do as the Romans do. While culture and tradition are not the only influence on morality it does play and integral part in who we are and what we believe.

Example: The Rastafarian who has been believes that eating meat is forbidden would say that the person who eats meat is doing something that is wrong or improper.

In the nature vs nurture debate, nature is often defined in this debate as genetic or hormone-based behaviours, while nurture is most commonly defined as environment and experience. (Good Therapy 08.12.2015). It can be argued then, that a man was born knowing what is proper and proper and that is actions are not influenced by on culture and tradition but from