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.
In fact and my opinion, this understanding is totally wrong. As it said in the book by Qutb, I argue that Islam is not an antique thing. Even though Islam is considered done with the Arabs, but it will be never done with the people. The rules in Islam are
Moral Law in the most general terms that can be imaged is a person’s need to right in the world. In the terms of C.S. Lewis, Moral Law is not a fact about human nature and it is not an ideal image of how humans should behave.This law creates a reality that cannot be clearly understood. It is a real law that we as individuals did not make ourselves that is pressed upon us to do what is right. The moral law is something that boes beyond the facts of our human nature.
His conclusions lack good support: “Freewill defense places too much weight on freedom, and not enough weight on the lives and wellbeing of innocents” (4) Wrong, freedom is and it is absolute. “The freewill defense simply gets the moral facts wrong” (4). Again, freewill is just there, it exists and it is not supposed to get anything right or
Rachels and Benedict disagree about how relative is morality.in one hand Rachels express that morality is not relative, because from his point of view what is right or wrong cannot be based in one society code; it is clear that what is approved in one culture can be disapproved in other, so there is no absolute true nor a single standard to follow. Rachels state that there are some moral rules that all societies will have in common, because those rules are necessary for society to exist. According to this he think that there is some universal codes that have to be maintain for a healthy balance. Benedict in the other hand believes that morality is relative. According to benedict morality depends on each culture behavior, and how society mold
This differences lead to a conflictual situation between nations as everyone has his own perception of freedom. Absolute freedom does not exist and will not, because freedom is what we make, the result of our perception of how far limits could be pushed
This type of law being more prominent in Islam countries doesn’t necessarily mean that it respects the laws of ethics. Under any circumstance, being religious or atheist, implementing sexist and misogynistic aspects of life into society is unethical and does not respect moral principles.
By denying the same right as anybody else just because you are different is a clear form of discrimination, and it goes against the constitution. Marriage is a contract between two people and honestly I think that the society should not be interfering this bond. Not permitting the right to marry another human is a severe violation of the human rights and freedom. James Carville “I was against gay marriage until I realized that I didn’t have one.” The statement is self-explanatory: “You don’t get to judge because you don’t have the
In my opinion, it is not the transgender who is terrible and it has nothing to do with them that cause society to act impolite. Well, hate and disrespect for each other is a human trait. To many people, gender roles are a fundamental part of their worldview, of how the world is and should be. To such people, the idea that these roles are changeable rather than set in stone, that a person can switch these roles, feels like an existential threat. The logical is something like ‘’if men can become women, then nothing is certain”.
The feminist and cultural relativist have the same critique but different goal. Feminists do not refute the theory that the international human rights is universal, but feminism critique about the practice of international human right, while Cultural relativist critique both the theory and practical of International Human Rights. Feminists argue that the universality that been said in the International Human Rights have not been realized in daily life practices, Feminism assumed that the right only owned and protect the men. Feminism felt like women are not the part of “human” category that stated in the Human Rights. Feminism believes that if the international human rights are truly universal, then the rights is not only for men but also for women which means there must be the right guarantee for women and the rule for their protection.