• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Moral Absolutism can Never be Justified. Discuss

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Moral Absolutism can never be justified The black and white, deontological dualism of moral absolutism has laid the foundations of our ethics, and has orientated the needle of the human moral compass. As with any durable structure, the base must be solid, thus justifying the use of moral absolutism in order to build a community. Deontological ethics is the basis for Teleological ethics, and without absolutism, relativism cannot exist. For example, without the principle that murder is wrong, it would be impossible to argue that there are mitigating circumstances in which it is right. However, now that societal laws have been built, can moral absolutism still be justified? Moral Absolutism is frequently associated with Christianity, since it reflects the immutability and perfect judgement of God. Like Christianity, moral absolutism offers answers which nothing else can explain, thus it is more applicable to everyday situations. For example, in the case of a snap decision, it makes sense to utilise the deontological ethics instilled in us from childhood, and perhaps even before then. ...read more.

Middle

Sceptics of Moral Absolutism might argue that it is too rigid a belief system, and cannot foresee a circumstance in which murder really would be acceptable. However, an absolutist can be absolute about anything, as described by Julian Baggini, "the moral rules can be as nuanced and finely distinguished as you like." This means that an absolutist could believe that murder is always wrong, except in self defence, or to protect a greater amount of people. Therefore, deontological ethics can evolve with modern day society, whilst also preventing cultural injustices. Surely then, moral absolutism is the way forward? Sadly, moral absolutism is a trap. It narrows our minds and halts ethical progression. If we take the example of fundamentalist religion, it is clear that absolutism leads to valuing one's own ideas above all others. The concrete conviction in certain moral beliefs prevents any form of moral honesty, or as James Elliot puts it, "I respect your right to have your opinion, but I'll spend the rest of my life disagreeing with it." ...read more.

Conclusion

Should slavery have continued, and an individual realises it to be wrong, this would be their ethic, and nobody else's. It is not their place to campaign for the abolition of slavery, since it is the right of proponents of slavery to continue on moral grounds. In other words, moral absolutism results in to absolutes being absolutely equal, and no campaigning or persuasion is even conceivable. Therefore, moral absolutism chokes the progression of society and allows the continued existence of injustice. In conclusion, moral absolutism in its most concrete form can never be justified, as it serves to empower racists, disable progressive thought and generate conflict between cultures. However, relativism as we know it cannot be justified either, since it is mere mutable absolutism. Relativism allows for the justification for any agenda, and when done so, is imposed absolutely. What those who are serious about their morality should search for is an absolutist ethic, so delicately nuanced that it permits persuasion, and keeps intact the integrity of cultures and separate belief systems. ?? ?? ?? ?? Jonathan Inglis Moral Absolutism can Never be Justified ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Practical Questions section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Practical Questions essays

  1. Can moral absolutism be justified?

    The practise of situation ethics also takes into account the outcome of an action and opposes that of moral absolutism, as making moral conclusions according to situation ethics relies only on the principle of love or agape. To do what is most loving in a situation may be seen as

  2. Utilitarianism VS Kantian Deontological Ethics

    As long as you did not mind your own son not attending your funeral, the action seems justified by Kant's categorical imperative, and remains coherent. Kant requires us to ask the question 'what if everybody did that?' If everybody skipped funerals, then no one would go to funerals and so

  1. From the religion you have studied, discuss the view that religious ethics must be ...

    Other Christians and philosophers, however, put duty first. Duty is derived from value; we ought to do what helps achieve the goal. The word duty refers to an obligation that is based on a relationship or that results from one's station in life.

  2. "Humanitarian intervention, which is ruled out by realism and the morality of states, can ...

    When it involves others, the individual is subject to regulation in the interest of preventing harm to others. Mill also constructed a liberal defence of intervention in cases where the destruction of the target population could be shown to the responsibility of the intervening power.

  1. Duties and Deontological Ethics

    most immediately follows the mandate of natural law that we are to be sociable. Concerning our duties towards God, he argues that there are two kinds: (1) a theoretical duty to know the existence and nature of God, and (2) a practical duty to both inwardly and outwardly worship God.

  2. Considering the claims of both absolutism and relativism, discuss the importance of situation ethics ...

    is only wrong because the act in itself breaks a moral rule. Absolutists are deontological thinkers as they are concerned with the acts, not the consequences whereas relativists are teleological thinkers, 'telos' meaning end, as they are concerned with the endings, the consequences.

  1. The Dreamings as being fundamental to Aboriginal cultures & societies

    Protectn Board est.'d 1883 ( missionaries b/cm interested in welfare of Abor. ( Abor. b/cm increasingly institutionalised ( Abor. b/cm dependant on govt. & reserves ( 1915 ( Amendments to 1909 Act, granting power to remove children fr. their parents for training: Stolen Generation ( 1940s-1950s ( Eur.

  2. Explain the differences between Cultural Relativism and Cultural Absolutism

    neighbour? in the Bible or ?Let him who desires his own advantage not harm another? which is found in Buddhist text. This shows that although these religions can be very different, the fundamental values found are the same. Cultural absolutists believe these values are the same in human beings around the world, regardless of culture.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work