Two Points Of Moral Relativism

Moral nihilism which is also called ethical nihilism is a myth way of saying that nothing in the world is based on something that is specifically right or definitely wrong. Basically speaking, a moral nihilist would infer from a murder as for any particular excuse, that the problem is not necessarily wrong or inherently the correct way to act as each individual sees morality in different points of views. It is a distinct from moral relativism, allowing humans relating similar opinions to one another making something correct/incorrect in a non-objective sense, but does not have any proof whatsoever that a statement is statically from truth-values. Moral relativism defers from moral nihilism. It is based on individuals relating similar standards

Contemporary virtue theories do not grasp nor represents the Aristotelian theory, because they think that it is impossible to escape the charge of relativism in virtue ethics. According to the relativist approach, ethical goodness is relative to each society depending on its traditions and practices. It is thought that virtue can only be outlined locally with reference to a single locale. Relativists reject the idea that there is a general rule, based on specific virtuous actions, that leads to the good life i.e. they reject that there is a single virtue (or norm of flourishing life) that is able to flourish the life of all human beings.

8) Kant states that if Gods doesn’t exist, then the universe is incomplete immoral, due to that virtue will be unrewarded and wickedness will not be punished. 9) Hobbes argues that ethics is a result from when people come to realize what they must do to live as best as they are able to. 10) Rachels continues to state that a supportive society can only exist if we come to adopt certain aspects

To add with, cultural relativists also believe that there do not exists a universal evaluative grading standard to measure the value of culture due to the differences among them; therefore, no culture can be judged by the standard of other groups. Customs and behaviors of different societies are rational and reasonable in their own terms. All cultures should be viewed as equally able to fulfill the needs of their members. (Encyclopedia Britannica, 2010, p. 876) According to cultural relativism, a custom or a thought within a certain society cannot be simply judged as right or wrong, superior or inferior. For instance, a great number of Inuit groups leave their aging parents who are too old to shoulder their share of the workload out

On a personal level, this Okoye’s claim appears unfair. Using the word “religions” it refers to a certain set of principles and beliefs that have their own say and foundation. As far as I can engage my personal knowledge, the difference between Christianity and any other faith, other than the Abrahamic religions, is the significance of the Trinity and the birth, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ as the Son of God. I am curious to know in what respect, the author claims that idolatry in the African cultural context does not exist and that there is no paganism of any sort. Evidently, such rituals do not resonate with Christian values or tradition.

War is not about coming home a hero, it is the survival of your life and when you’re there; there is no way out, hence don’t listen to stories given about the great stories because it may be a lie. In addition, O’Brien says that a true war story “is never moral. It does not instruct nor encourage virtue, nor suggest models of proper human behavior…you can tell a true war story by its absolute and uncompromising allegiance to obscenity and evil” (O’Brien 347). This quote proves the fact that we are born to expect events such as war to be an honor, however it is a hell; if it sounds too good to be true than it is a true war

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.

Judgemental happiness is when we express our beliefs about things. As happiness is subjective we can never be 100% certain that our experience of happiness will be same as other’s experience of it. According to me happiness can never be compared as the reasons behind be different. The intensities of it are different. No matter how hard you try to generalize happiness it can never be generalized.

All persons are unique individuals who are never to be used for anyone else’s purposes or ends. D. Major Weaknesses 1. Rules are inconsistent. 2. Which rules are morally valid to follow?

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. No one can say if someone else is right or wrong, it is a matter of personal opinion and no society can pass judgement on another society.