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

moral relativist

Extracts from this document...


(2) a) Explain Moral Relativism. (33) Moral relativism is the belief that morality does not relate to any absolute standards of right or wrong, but that right and wrong depend on things such as circumstances, religion and culture. In this way moral relativists are the opposite of absolutes, which is the belief that there are standards of right and wrong that are right regardless of circumstances, religion and culture. Absolutists, such as Plato argue that moral rules should be the same for everyone, with no exceptions; they believe that what is right for one person is right for another. This is known as universalisability. Moral relativists do not believe in universalisability, they believe that no-one can judge someone else because of their actions, because nothing is always wrong, and nothing is always right, because different things are right or wrong for different people based on circumstances, religion and culture. J.L.Mackie argues in his book 'Ethics': Inventing Right and Wrong' that our morality is shaped by our society, and claims that if morality has an absolute value then it is difficult to know what form this standard will take. ...read more.


It also expects too much of people. It may also sometimes go against what the bible states. Social contract theory which looks at how morality is based on the needs of society and that there is no absolute right or wrong, or an outside law giver. Thomas Hobbes who believed in this theory, argue that right and wrong are determined by the need for people to ignore their naturally selfish desires and work in the interests of the group. They determine right and wrong by looking at what is necessary to reduce conflict. Utilitarianism is another moral system proposed by Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill it looks at how there is no ultimate or absolute goodness but find a course of action that will please the majority. They believe that good is 'the greatest amount of happiness, for the greatest number'. b) 'Moral Relativism is an unacceptable ethical theory'. Discuss. (17) There are many problems with Moral Relativism, in which many would say that it is an unacceptable ethical theory. ...read more.


Therefore we are made into a better person. Also moral relativism promises that once we are successful in creating the sort of person we want to be, then arriving at and making decisions will come to us naturally for the rest of our lives as we have achieved the good person we want to be. Therefore many people would argue that natural law and absolute theories are in fact the unacceptable ethical theories as they do not give people the opportunity to be independent and make moral decisions using their own common sense in the same way as moral relativist theories do. Instead it just lays down rules that we should all follow without giving any independency or choice of what we believe is right and wrong. However many argue Moral relativism is in fact an acceptable ethical theory as it gives people the opportunity to be independent and make moral decisions using their own common sense, and gives us the choice of what we believe is right and wrong. ...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. Assess Critically the Claim that Situation Ethics Provides a Better Method of Solving Moral ...

    problem should not be considered, Situation Ethics urges the moralist to take every issue into account. Furthermore, probably the main contrasting aspect of these two moral codes is their consideration for effects or results. Essentially, Situation Ethics is primarily concerned with the possible outcome of an action, in terms of whether it will create the most loving conclusion.

  2. The Ethical Debate Concerning Cloning.

    in therapy; triage decisions about conditions like complicated hepatic coma; selective abortion in intrauterine diagnosis; abortion on request a la the Supreme Court's recent decision; genetic engineering? Again without discussing them, what should we do or not do about behavior control by psychosurgery or chemotherapy; positive and negative euthanasia; cyborgs

  1. Outline the general ethical responsibilities on helping relationships and discuss them with examples from ...

    The general codes of ethics are: * Responsibility - safety of clients or patients rests with the professional whilst in their care. However, according to Jones et al 2000, counselling may tend to be concerned with the principles of autonomy, and therefore do not often take responsibility for their clients,

  2. Natural Moral Law

    Aquinas maintained that it is to live, reproduce, learn, worship God and order society. All things must operate in accordance with these principles to which man is naturally inclined. " Men will fall short of God's best for them because this is a fallen world and man violated the perfect

  1. How might a moral relativist respond to the claim that people should always tell ...

    When responding to a situation, who has the right to justify whether the action was morally right? Is justification dependant upon love, motive, intention or belief? Where does love factor into a situation? If love is the determining factor behind a lie, is it therefore justified?

  2. There are no moral absolutes, discuss.

    Joseph Fletcher, founder of situation ethics argued that in certain situations, absolutist principle have to be put to one side in order to do the right thing. He believed that absolutism didn?t lead to the best of most loving outcome, and the best thing to do may be to break a rule.

  1. Explain the differences between absolute and relative morality. 'Relativist theories give no convincing reason ...

    This means that a relativist theory of morality is subjective: it may change depending on personal opinions and therefore could also be biased. Descriptive relativism states that in different societies, across different times, people have believed different things about what is morally right.

  2. When dealing with zombies, one can find a lot of examples that relate with ...

    For example, in the first episode of the T.V series The Walking Dead by Frank Darabont, Morgan, a father that was fighting to survive and trying to protect his son from a bunch of zombies, finds himself in a situation where he does not know what to do.

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