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

How might a moral relativist respond to the claim that people should always tell the truth?

Extracts from this document...


How might a moral relativist respond to the claim that people should always tell the truth? When the word "moral" is looked up in a dictionary, it gives the following definition - concerned with right or wrong conduct, a moral lesson or principle, a person's moral habits. Moral relativism is along the same lines, as moral relativism is the theory that morality, or standards of right or wrong are culturally based and therefore become a matter of individual choice. You decide what's right for you, and I'll decide what's right for me. Moral relativism says, "It's true for me, if I believe it." Moral relativism is strongly linked and related to meta-ethics. Meta-ethics has produced a large number of different theories that have helped to find and understand the meaning and function of ethical terms like 'good' and 'bad'. These are very usefully classified under three general headings: 1) Ethical Naturalism; 2) Intuitionism; and 3 Emotivism. The ethical naturalism theory teaches that all ethical statements can be translated into non-ethical ones. ...read more.


This definition makes the question, 'I know a banana is a fruit, but is it yellow?' pointless because the first part of the sentence has already supplied the answer to the question. It is what G E Moore calls a 'closed question'. Moore concludes that that a definition is correct when the question asked is closed and incorrect when the question is open. Asking an open question, in other words, means that the two expressions being used do not mean the same thing. Therefore, G E Moore is teaching ethical non-naturalism / intuitionism. Ethical non-naturalism is G E Moore's own moral theory. If ethical language can ever be reduced to factual statements, then it can never be regarded as true or false on the basis of observable evidence. Does this mean that ethical statements can never be considered true or false? Moore denies this. We do process another method of verification, in which we decide whether an ethical proposition is true or false through a process of moral intuition. ...read more.


I live in a world of children where "truth" is what we recall instinctively. So, if I am being threatened I say what I think I need to say to remove the threat. If I am asked if I believe in Father Christmas - I do, because I know no different from what my parents told me. So, I think I always tell the truth. Last year I asked my Dad if Mum was dying, he said no. But she did. Last year I asked my Dad if my Mum was dying, he said yes. And she did. In summary, a Moral relativist would answer in the context of his or her own culture and experience. I think that there is more to life than just truth and a Moral relativist would have to think about the context of the question as much as the definition of truth. So, I think the answer would be "it depends". Strengths - there is a lot of support for a point of view from the society because judgements reflect the values of the community. Weaknesses, a corrupt society could lead to corrupt values, which may ultimately not be sustainable in the wider world. ...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. How Plausible is Cultural Relativism

    Aquinas believed that "natural law is the same for all men...there is a single standard of truth and right for everyone"7 In a more modern context, the UN Declaration of Human Rights sets out a list of absolute and universal rules.

  2. Compare and contrast Plato and Aristotle on the acquisition of ethical understanding.

    These virtues would then contribute to the individual having the greatest happiness and becoming Eudemonic, living well. In this sense it is clear that justice is taken in very different ways by the philosophers. Aristotle identified two different senses of 'just'.

  1. Explain what Scholars means when they say ethical statements are no more than expressions ...

    This can be supported by Ayer's view saying 'ethical terms do not serve only to express feelings. They are calculated to arouse feelings and so to stimulate action' Ayer's thoughts suggest that ethical statements could not be verified because it is an opinion based on an individual's experience and how they want others to agree and follow.

  2. Explain how Meta-Ethics differs from Normative Ethics.

    The first being G.E.Moore, he declared that moral judgements were based on unreliable intuitive knowledge of good things. He believed that it was impossible to define the term 'good'. He believed it was a simple idea, like 'red'. Moore said that non-moral arguments couldn't be used to establish moral conclusions.

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

    What this could imply is that even Christian ethical theories do not have a very strong connection to God. Because human life isn't respected or valued. In short, to any teleological theory, murder could potentially be justified, and therefore proved to be the morally right thing to do.

  2. Explain ethical egoism. Do you believe that it is true? Why or why not?

    If an individual helped others, then the individual would count on help from those whom were helped. In the act of war, one might sacrifice their life in order to save entire drove, seemingly placing their selfishness aside. Although the intent seems to derive form a altruistic intention, the motive

  1. Discuss whether moral judgements are subjective or objective

    When we look at the action itself or the motive of the person performing the action we call this deontological eg Rule Utilitarianism. Utilitarianism was devised by Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill who believed that moral actions are right or wrong depending on the consequence.

  2. Discuss critically the claim that Freewill and Determinism are incompatible

    Thus, freewill does not exist. If you agree with this argument then you are taking the position of incompatibilism. Incompatibilism is the principle that determinism is incompatible with freewill. I agree with this principle, I find it almost impossible to believe that freewill can be determined; the two terms almost contradict each other.

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