Moral Absolutism
Defined
- The belief that there are absolute standards against which moral questions can be judged.
- Belief that morals are not determined by society or situation.
- Moral laws are inherent in the laws of the universe, nature of humans, or some other source.
Moral Absolutism as a Basis of Morality
- Moral
absolutism regards actions as inherently or inarguably moral or
immoral. Moral absolutists might, for example, judge slavery, the death
penalty, or childhood female genital mutilation to be absolutely and
inarguably immoral regardless of the beliefs and goals of a culture
that engages in these practices.
- Modern
human rights theory is based on a form of absolutism. To the extent
human rights theorists believe that human rights are, for example,
“inalienable”, the theory rests on a foundation of moral absolutes.
Important Moral Absolutists (at least in part)
- Kant, Rawls, Rosseau, Plato
Criticisms of Absolutism
- It
can lead to ethnocentric thinking. Once a person views her culture as
universal, she cannot see the value or perspectives of others.
- Inability
to discuss/debate. Once one is convinced of the inviolability of his
position, it is difficult to discuss/debate/compromise/see
alternatives.
- It can become the justification for cruel acts to eliminate “incorrect” thinking.
Moral Relativism
Defined
- Belief that moral propositions do not reflect absolute or universal truth.
- Moral relativists believe that ethical judgments emerge from social customs and personal preference
- There is no single standard by which to evaluate ethical truth.
- Many moral relativists see moral values as applicable only within cultural boundaries.
Practice
- Greek Philosopher Protagoras “man (sic) is the measure of all things”
- David Hume (18th century):
argued for the importance of understanding the difference between
issues of fact and opinion. He argued that moral/opinion judgments had
to be separated from questions of fact, because they could not be
verified.
- Ruth Benedict: argued that absolutism would lead to ethnocentrism
- o said
there are no morals, only customs, and in comparing customs, the
anthropologist, "insofar as he remains an anthropologist, he is bound
to avoid any weighting of one in favor of the other."
- o
Leads to conflicts about the validity of judging the actions of other
cultures from one’s own viewpoint. Can a person from the West honestly
evaluate the actions of another culture from a neutral, objective point
of view?
Criticisms of Moral Relativism
- Can
justify actions that are almost indefensible. Historical events and
occurances, such as the Holocaust, Stalinism, Apartheid, Genocide,
Unjust wars, Genital mutilation, Slavery, Terrorism, and Nazism, among
many other examples, present difficult problems for relativists. An
observer in a particular time and place, depending on his outlook
(e.g., culture, religion, background), might call something good that
another observer in a particular time and place would call evil.
- Fundamentally
contradictory. Michael Berumen argues if relativism were wholly true,
there would be no reason to prefer it over any other theory, given its
fundamental contention that there is no preferred standard of truth. He
says that it is not simply a meta-ethical theory, but a normative one,
and that its truth, by its own definition, cannot in the final analysis
be assessed or weighed against other theories.
Uploading ....