Relativism and Morality

Relativism and Morality

Introduction

“Live and let live.” This statement is quite identical to the principle with people are aware of. Though, they need to admit that Gert asked the actual significance of this principle. The statements need to be assessed separately in order to comprehend a proper meaning. There is no doubt the sentence is quite good and people also strongly agree with this statement. By opposing the law of “Love thy neighbor as thyself”, it is quite nice and can be acquired by the humans. The statement “live and let live” provides humans an opportunity to have a moral character. The principles of morality should be in such a way that can make it possible for the humans to achieve it without any problem. It has been mentioned that the concepts of morality provides a perfect guidance for the humans to remain in peaceful manner. Those people who try to reduce their wrong acts at certain point of time, they get closer to the principles of morality. In this particular scenario, people then slowly adopt a moral approach towards various activities in life. Therefore, all the issues related to relativism and morality will be discussed in detail.

Discussion

Moral relativism is an ambiguous concept; this is the first thing of which to take note. The second is that in spite of the ease and frequency with which it springs from people's lips, very few people are comfortable identifying themselves as proponents of any doctrine so called. The standard textbook treatment of moral relativism identifies three distinct theories with it: ethical subjectivism, conventionalism, and historical relativism. Ethical subjectivism is the doctrine that the validity of moral judgments is determined by or relative to the individual or subject. So, although the respective positions of two people over, say, the moral standing of abortion, are mutually incompatible, one person claims that it is immoral while the other denies this neither can be said to be more or less correct than the other, for both points of view are equally legitimate. Conventionalism is the position that the validity of moral determinations is relative to, not the individual subject, but the conventions of the culture from within the framework of which they are made. If, then, two contemporary cultures like, say, the West and Islam, advance mutually incompatible views on, for example, the proper treatment of women, it is inappropriate to conclude from this that ...