Moral Theories: Absolutism And Relativism

There are four types of egoism (ETHICAL EGOISM). The first is Psychological egoism and it is the view that humans are always motivated by self-interest. An example of this is …….. The second is Ethical egoism. This is when you should do something that is in your own self-interest. An example of this is performing a task for someone because you are getting paid to do it. Third is Individual ethical egoism. It states that everyone should act in their own best self-interest. An example of this is a policeman. He/she believes that they should do what is in their best interest just because of their role in society. Finally there is Universal ethical egoism. It states that everyone should always act in their own best self-interest, regardless of the interests of others, unless their interests

Believing in ethical egoism means that you’re classifying all humans in two groups; you and the rest of the world. You believe your values are better and are right compared to other people’s values. If you think your duty is to do what is best for yourself, and you do not care about others only if they benefit you, it can lead to many problems. You can use the example of a 60-year-old man shooting his letter carrier seven times because he was $90,000 in debt and thought that being in prison would be better than being homeless. This guy in making the decision to kill the letter carrier was thinking about himself. He was not thinking about the letter carrier, his family, etc. If you believe in ethical egoism, you would conclude that it was normal for the 60-year-old guy to do and you have to accept his

Morality seeks to provide a moral agreement that binds the people in a society by providing a blueprint of shared values that dictate what is right and wrong. The two principles of morality are moral objectivism and moral relativism. The thesis of this essay is that moral relativism is a better guide to morality as compared to moral objectivity as it puts things into perspective by considering moral ideas and variables on a universal understanding.

Psychological egoism is the interpretation that humans are always inspired by self-interest, even in what seem to be acts of altruism. It claims that, when people choose to help others, they do so ultimately because of the personal benefits that they themselves expect to obtain, directly or indirectly, from doing so. Psychological egoism, which was widely recognized by psychologists and philosophers states that all human actions are motivated by selfish needs to benefit themselves. According to psychological egoists true altruism does not exist because the consequence of such an act leads to an increase in personal happiness. However, Joel Feinberg does not agree with that theory and in his essay he disagreed with the thesis that altruism

There are many different types of ethical egoism: Personal ethical egoism, Individual ethical egoism, Universal ethical egoism, Categorical egoism, and Hypothetical egoism. Personal ethical egoism is the belief that one should act for

Ethical Egoism is a normative claim; it believes that individuals should always in their best interest. Another view of ethical egoism is that a person should act according to his own self-interest even if it goes against the values and beliefs of others.

From a relativist's perspective, moral values are only applicable within certain cultures and societies. Something that may be viewed as morally correct in the United States could be unethical in Zimbabwe and vice versa. For example, in Somalia, it is acceptable, or moral for a family to kill a female family member if she is raped, while here in the United States the murder of a family member is viewed as extremely unethical and cruel. A more simplistic example of this is the fact that it is not unethical in American culture to consume beef, while in India it is viewed as unethical. The reason for this is because of the diverse cultures and their own set of moral standards. This theory states that there are many values and ideas that can be considered morally correct while disagreeing with one another. However, there are also few downsides to this theory. Relativism may lead to immorality because of opposing perspectives and cultures. Just because one culture views something as good or bad, right or wrong, does not mean this is true. This theory is based off of personal preferences and values, which can lead to conflict and clashing of values. Relativism also does a poor job of establishing an absolute set of ethics, and does not take into consideration that the values and norms of a society can change over time.

Moral Relativism is generally used to describe the differences among various cultures that influence their morality and ethics. According to James Rachels, because of moral relativism there typically is no right and wrong and briefly states : “Different cultures have different moral codes.” (Rachels, 18) Various cultures perceive right and wrong differently. What is considered right in one society could be considered wrong in another, but altogether all cultures have some values in common.

The ethical theory of moral absolutism has raised many arguments since Plato produced the Theory of the Forms. Philosophers have argued over it for centuries; whether it is correct, whether we should be absolutists or relativists or whether we bypass both of these theories and decide our actions based on virtuous people.

I will start with explain egoism. Egoism is the theory that one's self is, or should be, the motivation and the goal of one's own action. This theory gets in the way of a lot of ethical theories including Gert’s moral rules or how I like to think of them, “guidelines.” Gert’s rules is pretty much for the all good of everyone’s happiness, but not everyone can be happy, so how does this work? Egoism is for you and only you to be happy. Gert has statements like do not cause pain, thus one should say who should not cause pain. If there was plain then there could be no pain, which

On the other hand, ethical egoism is a theory that prescribes moral obligation, where all people should be motivated out of self interest (Rachels, 2003, p. 70). This means that every person ought to act in a way that is best for him/herself. Ethical egoism claims that it is moral for all of an individual’s actions to be based on self-interest, without concerning him/herself with the interests of others. In fact, this thought may be continued by stating that altruism is, therefore, personally hindering and even demeaning (Brink, 1997, p. 122). Hence, ethical egoism must consequently mean that actions taken in an individual’s self-interest are moral actions, and actions taken that are not self-beneficial to an individual are immoral and should, as a result, be avoided.

Ethical egoism claims that all our actions can be reduced to self-interest. This is a controversial moral theory which sometimes can be detrimental. Without a well-defined framework of the nature of self-interest, ethical egoism enlarges the animalistic nature of humanity in which can result in unfavorable consequences. Ethical egoism also fails to provide a solution when a conflict of interest arises. By only acting out of one’s self

Descriptive egoism holds that for each individual, there is only one ultimate aim survival and the betterment of the sole individual based on their own hierarchical principles.

The three arguments for Ethical Egoism discussed are: 1) Altruism is self-defeating; 2) Ethical Egoism as the moral theory of a rational agent; 3) Ethical Egoism is compatible with common sense morality

Ethical egoism assigns to that people act only for their self-interests, and don’t care about others as much as they care about their own benefit. Furthermore, utilitarianism is a theory points out that the aim of action should obtain the largest possible balance of pleasure over pain or the greatest happiness of the greatest number. Moreover, the ethical duty refers to when someone recognizes a duty, that person theoretically commits himself to its fulfillment without considering