Relativism and Morality: Analysis of Lenn Goodman's 'Some Moral Minima'
995 Words4 Pages
Relativism and Morality: Analysis of Lenn Goodman's "Some Moral Minima" In "Some Moral Minima," Lenn Goodman argues that there are certain things that are simply wrong, which presents the platform for a heated debate to arise as to whether this notion is right or wrong. In the context of modern society, relativism has always had a place, especially in the forming of societal and behavioral norms to which those in a certain society are expected to comply. However, on a smaller individual level, relativism is in fact relative from person to person with a set standard of behavior impossible to comply with on an overarching level. In essence, for every good-natured altruistic person exists another who is selfish and cruel, which makes some issues that many find "morally wrong" deemed acceptable in the minds of this minority. In viewing Goodman's case for relativism, and in applying this understanding to several real-world moral issues, one can come to understand that certain actions are inherently wrong, but there exists a selection of actions that can be debated both ways. Goodman makes a case in "Some Moral Minora" that relativism's role in society is a "limited doctrine and that there are universally agreed to criteria that have trumped this thought process through the ages;" however, he argues that the practical applications for many other social issues through the political spectrum are still being "vetted," in a sense by the general public (Travis, 2011, p.1). This