.\'ll AT&T; 1:02 AM ocean.instructure.com present your views on all of these que
ID: 3487564 • Letter: #
Question
.'ll AT&T; 1:02 AM ocean.instructure.com present your views on all of these questions in our discussion for this Module OCEAN Questions Absolutism and Relativism Account The principle of moral absolutism tells us that the morality of an action is completely independent from history and culture. Thus, the absolutist tells us that we must interpret the moral rightness or the wrongness of an action as holding for all times and all situations, and we must look at people as improving morally whenever they "discover an objective moral truth and use it as a guide for behavior. For example, under the principle of moral absolutism, if the statement "Slavery is morally wrong."is a true judgment, then it is just as true within periods of history and within cultures which accept slavery as it is within cuiltures and periods of time when slavery is condemned. The absolutist would say that slavery did not become ethically wrong when the world began to reject slavery They would say that slavery was always wrong and that the world has slowly come to "see" this objective moral truth In contrast, the principle of moral relativism says that the only truth that is possible regarding morality is a "cultural relative truth This means that a sentence which says something like, "Slavery is morally wrong.is merely telling us that, this culture judges slavery to be morally wrong. In other words, the relativist principle says that any statement about morality can only be a statement about current cultural traditions and beliefs Calendar Inbox Help Moral absolutists get very upset by this view, for logically is implies that slavery could be moral, if some culture somewhere generally accepted it as moral Absolutists tell us that slavery was not morally acceptable when it was a widespread practice, any more than the world was flat at the time thait this was a common belief. The principle of absolutism says that just as peopie were at one time ignorant about the shape of the world, they were also ignorant of the moral wrongness of slavery. The "moral fact" is just as true for the absolutist as the "empirical fact. They are both facts that can be discovered by the Eight of The relativist say to this that calling cultural traditions that are different from ours "ignorant is an example of ethnocentrism, which is the practice of judging other cultures by the standards of one's own culture. For the relativist it is the ethnocentrist who is ignorant, or at least narrow minded, because he or she cannot accept that other cultures can have their own truth, just as our culture has its own truth. And this can lead to the imperialistic practice of one culture mposing its traditions and beliefs on another culture in the name of morality Where do you stand in this debate? It is one thing to say that "some traditions and beliefs are culturally relative, such as the practice of eating with your fingers, or the belief that tattoos look cool. Buit how about the practice of slavery, or wife beating, or having sex with young kids? Is our culture's rejection of these things an example of moral progress toward truth, or just cultural change, no different, in principle, than the change in cultural attitudes toward tattooing that has occurred over the past 50 years? Ie-Explanation / Answer
Moral absolutism says that if something is wrong it is wrong. There are no questions and ifs and buts about being wrong. Something which is wrong here, has to be wrong everywhere. Therefore, I think I would go by what moral absolutist’s say- wrong is wrong and should not be relative of time, culture, place and individual.
There may be certain traditions and cultures where it is ok to beat the wife. But, in my opinion it is wrong. No individual whoever or wherever he/she may be has no right whatsoever to physically or psychologically abuse the other person. Each individual has the right to be free and express their viewpoints but the morality and the rules of morality which are there are applicable to one and all. The moral and ethical rules and principles should be adhered to by all. No individual has the right to mould the rules, regulations and moral ethics to their whims and fancies.
Therefore, I would like to conclude that I would take the side of moral absolutists and sya that morality is absolute and not relative.
Related Questions
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.