What Does Moral Relativism Means

Moral Relativism is defined as the belief that conflicting moral beliefs are true. This carries the impression that what you respect as a right behavior may be a right conduct for you, but not for me. Moral Relativism is an attempt to

Moral relativism is the thing which is simply understood in contrast to moral autocracy that claims that morals relies on universal values and the god is the ultimate source of our common morality and that it is therefore as unchanging as what he is actually and the moral relativism asserts that morality is not based on any absolute standard and rather ethical “truths” depend on variables like state and culture etc

In philosophy there are many theories that philosophers argue, James Rachels argues the main points of moral relativism, where he describes the differences within cultures. Philosophers attempt to prove their theories to be true, but it can be complicated because if someone proves one premise false of your argument then the entire argument is invalid. There are different types of relativisms that favor moral relativism, such as, personal belief relativism, societal belief relativism, and then there is the cultural beliefs argument. All of these topics of relativism fall into the same category as moral relativism, meaning they all have the same general statement. Which is one cannot declare what is morally right or morally wrong. Moral relativism is the umbrella term and the others are points that can affect it. Moral Relativism claims that there is no objective truth concerning morality, therefore no one can draw a line between what is right or wrong.

Cultural relativism refers to the view that ethical systems or moral actions that are perceived to vary across cultural diversity are all equal and valid and as such, no one culture is better than the other is. For instance, by taking how words are used in one culture to mean a thing, the same words may be employed in a different culture to mean another thing. Another example is prayer announcements in Saudi Arabia can be heard from far distance which legal. Even if that may disturb your neighbors who are not Muslims. However, in United States such thing is illegal and consider a noise violation.

There are a lot of different cultures that make up the United States of America. Everyone wants to come to America because you can basically be anything you want to be and you have all the freedom to do so. Most countries have people of the same race, religion, and culture. The United States has people of all different races, religions, and cultures, which is why American is known as a “melting pot”. When a country is a melting pot, differences of race, religion, and culture become a lot less important than unity. Because there are so many different cultures that make up America, there are a lot of different moral values and norms.

The final areas addressed by Goodman were rape and clitoridectomy. Both of these actions are violations against another person. While it is known that both men and women are raped, rape is primarily recognized as a sexual crime against a woman. Rape not only involves forced sex; it often also includes assault, other physical injuries, and many times, even death. I can agree with Goodman (p. 92) “that rape is not a sexual crime but a power crime.” I also agree with Goodman’s statements: “Rape is wrong. It is always wrong. No circumstance can make it right.” (p. 92)

In a world of over seven billion people, it is not always easy to decide on what is moral right or wrong. Ethicists attempt to answer this by examining practices among people of different beliefs, cultures, and ideas to come up with the moral reasoning behind them. Of course, this in itself is difficult because it is often unclear and there is a fine line as to how far we should push the boundary. Both ethical relativism and moral absolutism are used to answer difficult questions posed by cultural pluralism.

Believing in relativism means that you believe different people can have different point of views about what is moral or immoral. Focusing in cultural relativism, is the idea that an individual's belief, values and practices should be understood given that person’s culture rather than to judge against a criteria of the other. In other words, the belief that morality is created collectively only by groups of people and morality at the whole is different from culture to culture. For example, many things in our daily lives such as food, language, rules and social norms are different within different cultures. Cultural relativism is not judging a culture to what our culture's standards of what is right or wrong, instead we should understand different cultures in its own cultural context. For example, instead of thinking, “eating grasshoppers are gross” we should instead think, “why do cultures such as china eat grasshoppers?”. You may learn that grasshoppers and many other insects are rich in protein and easy to farm. You have no right to judge or punish anybody in a relativistic society. What is right or wrong is defined by socialization. All over the world

Looking over the views of moral relativists and cultural relativists, I realized that there was an interesting similarity between their views. Although both moral relativist and cultural relativist views of subjective moral facts are based on their communities’ views, other external factors such as culture, social standpoint, social pressure and etc. dramatically affect a community’s view, thus,separating moral relativist and cultural relativist. As a result, these factor carries a substantial amount of bias in altering judgment of moral subjects. For example, actions of eating beef can be seen as right and wrong depending on the community you are in. If you are in a community that beef was staple food, eating beef would be seen as normal.

When it comes to prescribing the medication, the physician is the one who decides what the best course of action is. Although typically “most patients have received a prescription for an oral dosage of a barbiturate (pentobarbital or secobarbital), and beginning in 2015, a phenobarbital/chloral hydrate/morphine sulfate/ethanol mix has also been used” (Death with Dignity 2017.) Additionally, these prescriptions are not free and can cost anywhere from $400 to $600 depending on what medication is used. Although the prices for these medications have increased because of the European Union ban on exports to the United States of the liquid form of pentobarbital. This ban exists because it was being used for capital punishment which is “illegal and deemed

Moral relativism: Moral relativism is defined as the viewpoint of an individual on moral values, ethical standards or cultural values that individual believes in. It is subject to individual choice of a person that he believes for himself. Whether it is right or wrong is decided by himself. It is the notion which defines that there is no absolute value for right or wrong instead it is the personal opinion of an individual based on the circumstances or on the cultural orientation. It can be taken positively where it promotes tolerance or can be taken negatively by breaking law or doing something wrong. Pursuing IT as Christian vocation means God has selected you for a particular job and it is your duty to complete it and execute it in right

The question of ethics and what is considered to be ethical can be a difficult one to explain. There are many situations where right and wrong or black and white distinctions are perceptible. The right thing to do in the situation is easily able to be discerned, though it may not be the easiest thing to do. However, this particular state of affairs is the far rarer of the potential occasions. More often than not, trying to determine what is the right and/or wrong choice in a given situation is difficult, if not impossible. Usually the world is not divided into categorizations wherein things can be broken down into either good or bad, right or wrong, black or white. Times occur in life wherein a person will be met with the opportunity to make a choice between two options, of which the morally right or wrong thing may be difficult to ascertain. There will be times when the right or wrong thing will not be as obvious as one would like it to be. Sometimes an honest action will be unprofitable and thus unpleasant and it can be difficult for the individual to be willing to make that correct choice. Having said all this, the next question becomes how is right and wrong determined? The crux of relativism is the idea that morals are relative. This means that what is categorized as right or wrong is relative to the psychology of the society in which that morality exists.

Moral relativists believe that no one has the right to judge another individuals choice, decisions, or lifestyle because however they choose to live is right for them. In addition everyone has the right to their own moral beliefs and to impose those beliefs on another individual is wrong. At first glance moral relativism may appear ideal in allowing for individual freedom. After all why shouldn’t each individual be entitled to their own idea of moral values and why should others force their beliefs on anyone else. “American philosopher and essayist, Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882), tells us, what is right is only what the individual thinks is right. There is no higher court of appeals, no higher, universal, or absolute moral

Moral luck coexists with moral skepticism to support moral relativism. If a person cannot have any moral knowledge then it is luck that will determine the outcome. If a person had vast moral knowledge, they would be able to see or predict a close shot of the outcome of a situation that involves moral choices. If this person does not know anything about morals, then it is up to that persons luck to determine the outcome of the moral choice. According to Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, “Moral luck occurs when an agent can be correctly treated as an object of moral judgment despite the fact that a significant aspect of what she is assessed for depends on factors beyond her control.”(Nelkin,2004); Since it is up to moral luck to choose in moral choices, there cannot be any moral facts because it is luck that determines what the outcome will be. There is more than one type of luck, there is Circumstantial Luck, Resultant Luck Causal, Luck Constitutive Luck, and Everybody’s luck is different so there can be no moral facts, therefore supporting moral relativism.

Relativism is a theory that knowledge is comparative to the limited nature of the mind and the state of knowing. Moral Relativism is defined as the view that moral judgements are true and false only relative to some particular standpoint, and that no view is privileged over all