Moral and Cultural Relativism



Moral and Cultural Relativism

Introduction

Even though the dual subjects that are moral absolutism and moral relativism constitute analogous elements, still there remain some important differences between the two. Before getting into the nitty-gritty's of these two, there is a requirement of developing a firm understanding of moral absolutism and moral relativism separately.

Moral Relativism

Moral Relativism might be able to assimilate a variety of comprehensive stances. There are tri-pronged comprehensive stances and every single has dissimilarities in moral judgments that vary from culture to culture and people to people.

According to the very first comprehensive stance, moral relativism is Descriptive Relativism. It gives the description about the manner of things, not including a suggestion of the way they ought to be. Its only mission is to identify the fact that people often disagree in regards to the best course of action to take morally. According to the second comprehensive stance of moral relativism, it is a meta-ethical relativism. It is the stance that the falsity or truth of moral judgment is not objective. It states the fact the moral judgments are not justified in a universal manner, instead they remain relative to the practices, traditions and convictions that are belong to a specific group or singular individual.

According to the third comprehensive stance of moral relativism it is a comprehensive position of Normative Relativism. It states that since there a lack of universal standard of moral, through which judgment should be made, people ought to exhibit patience while tackling the other people's behaviors, even if their behavior is opposite to the moral standards of the individual or culture. A lot of philosophers however, agree that this particular stance is unclear and incoherent.

Moral Absolutism

Moral Absolutism differs in comparison to moral relativism in some specific means. It is a view of ethics that dictates the fact that some actions are absolute. They can either be wrong or right. The context, the actions nor do the consequences in regards to them matter in the smallest bit, for instance stealing. Thievery, shoplifting or stealing is morally reprehensible act which remains wrong even if the intentions of the thief is to provide some measure of help or relief to other people like the famous story of Robin Hood. The foundation of moral absolutism is based on the fact that at least one principle existence that must not be violated, Ever.

Discussion

Upon the consideration of moral absolutism ...