Relativist theories offer no convincing reasons for people to be moral. Discuss 25 marks

Authors Avatar by tahmed971 (student)

‘Relativist theories offer no convincing reasons for people to be moral.’ Discuss

Relativist theories do offer convincing reasons for people to be moral for several reasons however the main one is due to Joseph Fletchers ‘Situation Ethics.’  Relativism is the idea that nothing can be said to be objectively right or wrong; it depends on the situation, the culture, way of upbringing etc.

People would disagree with me because they are absolutists. This is an objective moral rule or value that is always true in all situations and for everyone without exception. Absolutists would believe that relativism offers no convincing reasons for people to be moral because morals can be manipulated by society which is always changing. An example of this is abortion. They would say that it is wrong and relativism is the reason why it has been made legal due to the changes in society. Secondly, they would say that the dependency thesis is too tolerant because different cultures/society’s would allow for different things (i.e. slavery could be allowed in one country but not another). From an absolute point of view, this is bad because there should be one universal moral law stating weather slavery is morally right or wrong.

Join now!

In my opinion, relativism offers convincing reason for people to be moral because of ‘agape.’ This is acting and thinking on the most loving thing to do. Joseph Fletcher came up with Situation Ethics that uses agape are the fundamental way of being morally right. Being a relativist allows me to think freely with my conscious in an unbiased way because I am able to change my opinion if I wanted to. Thinking upon my conscious is acceptable in my opinion because I believe that my conscience is ‘God’s’ voice guiding me in the right direction.

Situation Ethics allows ...

This is a preview of the whole essay