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

Explain the differences between relative morality and absolute morality.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Sarah Andrews Explain the differences between relative morality and absolute morality. The word moral [ from the latin word 'mores' meaning customs] is defined in the English dictionary as being 'concerned with right and wrong conduct' and the definition of morality is 'moral principles or rules; goodness or rightness'. The word ethics [ from the greek word 'ethos' ] is defined as meaning 'principles or standards of human conduct - sometimes called morals'. These definitions are what most people would expect but most people do not realise that there are different types of moralism and tend to have their own ideas as to what is morally right. Moral regulation of any kind has been necessary to a societies' well being throughout history. There are two main types of morality theories. Absolute morality is when universal standards of right or wrong apply to all people at all times irrespective of their culture or beliefs. Relative morality is based on the theory that truth and rightness is different for different people or cultures. Some schools of thought believe that morals were formalized into standards of conduct being developed after religious or cultural taboos were violated or when a certain behaviour became a habit. ...read more.

Middle

to promote tolerance of others.Christians, for instance, believe that the Ten Commandments were issued by God [their creator] to remind humankind of their obligations to life and others. Other religions have similar codes on which their faith is based.Unless there is universal belief in one true God there will always be differing opinions of what is right or wrong.Absolutists believe their way is right and could be accused of arrogance. This is illustrated by the work of missionaries that travel to remote cultures to teach them their values. Assess the strengths and weaknesses of moral relativism. Relative morality has had in the past many followers. Supporters of various forms of socialism and non religious groups usually support relativism in some form.An example of this is Marxism, a movement created by a German philosopher called Karl Marx. He argued that morality exists merely to give the ruling classes power. Power to monopolise religion, education. law and morality, allowing them to dictate values to others.Relativists do not believe that any one person should dictate how others conduct their lives. If taken to the extreme this could lead to individuals deciding what is morally right or wrong for themselves. ...read more.

Conclusion

But most social groups are ruled by the few who want the rest to follow their values. In the past this created imbalance in societies, as it does today, giving power to some. When pagen cultures decayed many turned to christianity because it seemed to give moral citizenship to all, even lowly people and slaves. People thought this would rebalance society. Relativism does have some strengths. It teaches tolerance of others who may hold different views, making people examine why different cultures behave as they do and encouraging compromise so that different people of different moral standards can co-exist.Relative morality appears to be more compatible with modern life. Whoever created mankind gave us the intelligence to evolve and adapt which means that moral values will inevitably change.Absolutists would argue that universal morality should exist whatever other changes take place but as long as the common denominator morals remain in place it is impossible to expect individual values to stay the same. Relativism seems to put the responsibility of good moral behaviour with the individual. Whilst we cannot have people behaving exactly how they would like without some consideration for others I think that to make individuals responsible for their own actions is a good moral starting place. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Ethics 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 GCSE Ethics essays

  1. What is the relationship between religion and morality?

    Ethics and religion can be linked by three possibilities. The first is autonomy. Autonomy is a system that holds that morality is autonomous if it is independent of religion. Its principles are justified on the basis of reason alone. It is not necessarily opposed to religion, and can be held by someone with religious beliefs.

  2. "'Right' and 'wrong' are just expressions of preference; they do not refer to any ...

    Emotivism too is a useful theory; it suggests that all moral views are just as important as each other because you cannot say one is totally correct or wrong. This is because it is based on personal opinion and feelings, which can never be debated seeing as they are personal to you.

  1. Different religious and philosophical views on controversial topics.

    However with certain strains of Buddhism, if they are under severe attack they are allowed to defend themselves, with the minimum force possible of course. They believe that fighting anger and violence only pushes one further down in the cycle of rebirth.

  2. With reference to abortion, examine and comment on the view that the sanctity of ...

    He created man "in his own image", so life should be honoured and revered. Of course, the various factions of the church have interpreted this in different ways, but the message that undoubtedly shines through concerns the view of The Sanctity Of Life.

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

    and so on in non-moral terms, commit to what he calls 'the naturalistic fallacy'. His argument is based on a technique he created for testing if definitions were correct or incorrect. He called this 'the open question technique'. For example, he used the word 'yellow', which has one of the definitions 'the colour of a banana'.

  2. Famine, Affluence and Morality - Peter Singer.

    help would be more likely to take place in the first place, rather than not at all. Also, one would be in a better position to decide how precisely to help someone near to one than if that person were far away.

  1. Are all human actions motivated by self-interest?

    if that person died, when they could have at least tried to save them. In other words, people can perform benevolent acts, but they cannot act benevolently. Humans cannot help acting in their own self-interest, even when they are helping others.

  2. Discuss whether moral judgments are subjective or objective

    Happiness is no longer applicable to individual acts or consequences but generalized rules. This is evident in the current British legal system - for example it is illegal to take another persons life. This certainly promotes happiness as people can live their lives freely.

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