This week we look at moral relativism, or the belief that morals are individual and/or cultural and not something shared by all people. Here’s a one-minute video giving a quick but accurate explanation of individual and cultural moral relativism: LINK (Links to an external site.) And here is a quick video by Audiopedia that accurately explains moral absolutism as compared to moral relativism and moral objectivism: LINK (Links to an external site.) In 2013, Pope Francis said that moral relativism "endangers the coexistence of peoples." He said what we need for peaceful coexistence is "a common ethics based on human nature." He called moral relativism a kind of "dictatorship" that endangers the world (Catherine Harmon, 2013; for source click link (Links to an external site.) ).
In her 2014 book called Plato at the Googleplex , Rebecca Goldstein wrote: “There used to be things that everybody thought were okay, and then just about everybody changed their minds about them, and could see that they were flat-out wrong.” And then she asked: “So how did that happen?” (Goldstein, Pantheon Books, NY, p.113). So, let's talk about it. Answer the first question and then your choice of either question 2 or question 3:
Paper For Above instruction
Understanding the concept of moral relativism is essential in discussing contemporary moral debates. Moral relativism posits that moral judgments and values are not universal but are shaped by cultural, individual, or societal contexts. This view suggests that what is considered morally acceptable in one culture or time period may be viewed differently elsewhere or at a different time. The implications of moral relativism are profound, affecting areas such as international relations, law, and personal ethics, where conflicts often arise between differing moral perspectives.
In the realm of moral decay, many individuals perceive a decline in societal morals today compared to previous generations. For instance, some argue that increased acceptance of behaviors like casual dating, drug use, or dishonesty in public life signifies a moral decline. When discussing morality with a friend or family member, it’s valuable to explore whether they see moral decay as a real problem and what specific examples they cite. They might point to the erosion of traditional family values, the rise of crime, or the decline of religious influence in moral education as evidence of moral decay. Such perspectives often reflect underlying moral frameworks influenced by cultural or religious beliefs.
Regarding moral relativism, it’s instructive to consider how individuals perceive its dangers or benefits.
Some view moral relativism as beneficial because it promotes tolerance and understanding among diverse cultures, preventing ethnocentric judgments. Conversely, critics argue that moral relativism can lead to moral nihilism, where no act can be universally condemned, thus undermining justice and human rights. For example, moral relativism might justify cultural practices such as genital mutilation or honor killings if they are culturally accepted, despite universal human rights standards. This debate underscores the importance of balancing respect for cultural diversity with the protection of fundamental human rights.
Turning to Rebecca Goldstein’s reflection on moral progress, her quote highlights how moral views have shifted over time from what was once widely accepted to being condemned as wrong. An example might be the abolition of slavery. Historically, many societies accepted slavery as a normal institution, but over time, moral consciousness shifted, and slavery became universally condemned. This moral awakening supports the idea that moral standards can evolve, which aligns with a non-relativist perspective emphasizing moral progress rooted in shared human values. If one believes that moral progress occurs historically, it suggests an underlying belief in objective moral values—a standard towards which societies evolve, rather than morality being merely relative to cultural contexts.
Alternatively, if moral views are seen as entirely dependent on cultural or personal preferences, then moral progress might be dismissed as merely shifting tastes rather than genuine improvements. This viewpoint aligns with moral relativism, which denies the existence of universal moral truths. Ultimately, the debate between moral relativism and moral objectivism hinges on whether moral progress is real or illusory. The historical examples of abolition, women's suffrage, and human rights advancements tend to support the idea that objective moral values exist and that humanity makes real moral progress over time.
In conclusion, understanding moral relativism involves recognizing its emphasis on cultural and individual differences in moral judgments, contrasted with moral objectivism’s assertion of universal moral standards. Engaging with perspectives from religious, philosophical, and cultural viewpoints illuminates the ongoing debate about the nature of morality and moral progress, emphasizing the importance of critical reflection on our moral assumptions.
References
Goldstein, R. (2014). Plato at the Googleplex. Pantheon Books.
Harmon, C. (2013). Pope Francis on moral relativism. Retrieved from [website]
Rachels, J. (2003). The Challenge of Cultural Relativism. In The Elements of Moral Philosophy (4th ed., pp. 27-38). McGraw-Hill Education.
Shweder, R. A., & Much, N. C. (2002). Who shall obey? The debate over cultural relativism. American Scientist, 90(4), 336–343.
Frankena, W. (1973). Ethics (2nd ed.). Prentice-Hall.
Rorty, R. (1988). Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature. Princeton University Press.
MacIntyre, A. (2007). After Virtue. University of Notre Dame Press.
Kant, I. (1785). Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals.
Hare, R. M. (1981). Moral Thinking. Oxford University Press.
Singer, P. (2011). Practical Ethics. Cambridge University Press.