Relativism and Morality

Relativism and Morality

Introduction

The purpose of this study is to expand the boundaries of our knowledge by exploring some relevant information relating to the analysis of Lenn Goodman's “Some Moral Minima”. Relativism is a philosophical school of thought considered in view of the fact that the truth of statements is always conditional. This means that each statement is based on conditions, which in turn is based on truth. This range of conditions can be associated with subjective beliefs, but not with unconditional, that is absolute truths. Relativists therefore believe that there are no absolute truths and no absolute moral values. Similar views are there in skepticism. Moral relativism is the idea that there are many systems of values, and none of them is absolutely the best system, so different cultures are entitled to the use of different systems. In this paper, the author will examine Goodman's work to explore the challenges he presents to relativism and also provide personal opinions to justify Goodman's arguments.

Discussion & Analysis

We are often confronted with situations that are primarily dependent on the fact that whether the decisions we are going to take, has any kind of moral implications or not. These moral decisions can be related to minor as well as major issues that we come across in life. It can either be right or wrong. But the big question: is it possible to adjudicate objects, events or decisions as totally wrong? Is there any universal code of conduct that can help in judging the morality of a decision? Goodman, in his work, “Some Moral Minima”, examines different aspects of morality and relativism suggesting that there are some things that are simply wrong.

I totally agree with Goodman's argument that “some things are simply wrong”. The first area of Goodman's argument is Genocide, politically induced famine, ...