Moral Relativism In High Schools

Moral Relativism is classified under any positions concerning the differences in moral judgments between people and the culture. Moral relativism is the position that ethical or moral propositions make claims regarding cultural or personal circumstances. Moral Relativism affirms relative form of validation of moral statements but doesn’t deny them. Moral relativist typically view the ethical standards of right or wrong are culturally based and are issued to a person's individual decision. Instead of making their decision on “what is right,” decisions are based on self-interest. This procedure has a negative impact on behavior and will affected the way we treat others.

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

Subjective relativism theorizes that an action is morally right if one approves it. Thus, with the person’s approval, the action immediately becomes morally right. However, this concept has major flaws. Subjective relativism believes that people are infallible and incapable of having flaws. This implies that individual in society cannot have a moral disagreement due to the fact the moral principles apply to everyone in society.

Pope Benedict once said, “We are moving towards a dictatorship of relativism which does not recognize anything as for certain and which has as its highest goal one’s own ego and one’s own desires.” When discussing the idea of Moral Relativism there are conflicting arguments as to if it is true in society or not. As much as Americans wish to ignore it, and although it has negative as well as positive effects, moral relativism is apparent all over the world. Moral Relativism is true and relevant today through individuals and cultures.

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.

Ethical relativist deny any objective moral values. Cultural relativism explains that in different times and in different places people act in different ways; they acquire different values and ideas of what is morally right and wrong. Moral relativism explains that there are no moral absolutes; everyone can do what they please and how they want whenever they like.

Moral and values is some of the things we learn as we grow up and these morals and values we learn from our parents and friends and also from our cultures and some of them you get to develop them as you grow up. The is so many ways to develop ones morals and values and cultural relativism and ethical subjectivism is of those ways that are used to develop morals and values.

Moral relativism is the idea that there is no absolute moral standard that is applicable to any person at any place at any given time. It suggests that there are situations in which certain behavior that would normally be considered “wrong” can actually be considered “right”. Moral relativism has played an increasingly significant role in today’s society, particularly regarding the differences between the countries of the world. This essay will summarize and explain both arguments in favor of and against moral relativism. Despite what many relativists believe, the arguments against are not only stronger, but also more accurate.

Ethical relativism simply stated, is that our upbringing and the culture we are raised in influences how we make a judgment with regards to what we deem to label with the titles right and wrong.

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)

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.

Cultural relativism is the view that all beliefs are equally valid and that truth itself is relative, depending on the situation, environment, and individual. Those who hold to cultural relativism hold that all religious, ethical, aesthetic, and political beliefs are completely relative to the individual within a cultural identity. Cultural relativism (CR) says that good and bad are relative to culture. What is "good" is what is "socially approved" in a given culture. Our moral principles describe social conventions and must be based on the norms of our society.

Moral relativism is the belief that there is no universal moral truth. Instead of seeking objective principles to guide their decisions, moral relativists look toward moral standards their cultural, social, historical, and personal circumstances. They do not view right and wrong as absolutes, but as personal opinions. True moral relativists have no ground to judge another person’s actions, as they believe each person has their own set of moral beliefs. Therefore, they cannot be judged as wrong if others disagree with their decisions. As Marquis de Sade, a French philosopher and politician, once said, “There is no action. . . that is truly criminal; or one that

On the surface, relativism holds moral beliefs to be fundamentally dependent on three factors. These include the prevailing beliefs of a specific culture, religion, or individual. It is these factors that determine what we consider right and wrong. Although this seems to imply that relativism holds moral beliefs to be subjective, the opposite is actually true. As stated by Elliot Sober, “First, they agree that there are ethical truths. Second, they agree that those truths are made true by someone’s say-so” (300). That is, relativists don’t hold ethical truths to be independent of social, religious, or individual context. No, ethical truths are intrinsically dependent on whichever of these frameworks a person subscribes to. Which of these frameworks is the correct one is a matter of debate amongst relativists. But the question we must ask is “are ethical truths nothing more than an agreed upon result of

Two main types of ethical relativism are cultural relativism and normative ethical relativism. Cultural relativism says that there are different cultures and they always have different ways of thinking behaving and learning from the generation before, and this can be seen in daily life just by how different countries do things like music, dress, and even politics. Normative ethical relativism says that there is no universal right or wrong in the universe instead it says that what is right or wrong is different from society to society and that there is no