Ethical Relativism – Total Freedom or Total Irresponsibility?

Outline

Introduction

The Concept of Moral Relativism

The Controversy

Reasons Against Moral Relativism

Reasons Which Support Moral Relativism

Conclusion

The question of moral judgment and moral choice is not only an important philosophical question, but also a practical application. Since ancient time people were looking for the regulating principles, which would be able to give an example of righteous and moral behavior.  Moral norms and regulations define human behavior and different moral theories can significantly influence people’s ethical standards, and thus their behavior. Ethical relativism becomes more and more popular nowadays. This ethical theory is based on the idea that there is no universal moral truth and perception of ethics and morals may vary for different people. In this paper we will use philosophical concepts of the most prominent philosophers in order to prove that moral relativism is a doubtful moral theory which can be used to justify moral mistakes and selfish behavior.

Relativism is a philosophical conception, which states that all things are relative and there are no objective measure of things and objects. Things can not be distinguished as big or small, light or heavy. All things exist in correlation to each other and can be measured or estimated only in comparison to other things.  Moral relativism applies same judgements to moral norms and principles. According to this ethical theory, people do not share same common moral knowledge and each person is guided by his own moral regulations.

Moral relativism can have negative consequences because  it  assumes the absence of common norms and regulations, which would be applicable to  all situations. A lot of outstanding philosophers turned to moral skepticism while defining common norms and regulations. There are several examples which illustrate  moral skepticism and ethical relativism. Abortion and death penalty are the most common examples which cause moral doubts and can serve as examples for the theory of  moral skepticism and ethical relativism. There  is no  agreed view on abortion. Proponents of abortion speak about the rights of unborn babies and state that murdering them is a crime. Their opponents speak about rights of women, who, in the case of prohibition of abortions, lose part of their rights and freedoms. They lose right to plan and control their lives and are made to give birth to undesired babies and take care about them. The question about the death penalty also raises moral doubt. From the one side death penalty can be treated as immoral actions because people are deprived   of life. At the same time, proponents of the death penalty insist on severe punishment as a response to breaking social and moral norms and also justify their positions. These examples illustrate that there are questions and subjects which arise debates and discussions. They can be treated as subjects of moral controversy and used as proofs of moral relativism.

 Theories of popular philosophers of the past can be useful for distinguishing the source of moral norms and regulations.  Plato, one of the most prominent philosophers of the past speaks about universal wisdom and universal laws, which should be followed by all people.  At the same time, he some of his ideas are very close to the ideas expressed by moral relativists. In his famous dialogue Theaetetus Plato describes Protagoras’  teaching about knowledge. According to this teaching, “Man is the measure of all things” (Plato).  This expression is used to explain an idea that each human being is individual in his or her perceptions and judgments. Different people perceive same things differently and this means that there can not be objective truth. This way it becomes impossible to distinguish who is right and who is wrong.  Out perception is subjective and everything I feel I can perceive only through my own experience. There is no other measure for  truth than personal perception of each individual. Since knowledge is described as perception or judgment, it becomes important to distinguish universal categories, which would  let us to make further reflections about the nature of knowledge. But it becomes impossible if we make equal experience and individual perception.  Personal nature of any perception results in the absence of universal standards which would help to define universal characteristics of knowledge. This way we may say that knowledge is also personal thing and cannot possess a universal nature. Idea about the “man as the measure of all things”  can be interpreted as subjective of objective relativism. By the end of the dialogues Plato confronts these arguments and underlines that there are universal categories, which can be used as sources of universal wisdom and moral regulations for all people. Plato develops this thought to the idea that there are wise and fool people and that they possess different quantity of knowledge and they become different measurement of things.  This example proves that other person can have better understanding about perceptions of the person. This puts under the doubt the idea about man being the measure of all things. According to Protagoras’ theory, each person has right judgments because every person is his or her own judge and they cannot be compared. Everything judged becomes right and true. But in this case people cannot pass knowledge and teach each other, but we see that man people are able to pass their perceptions and judgments to other people and they become  for them.

Kantian ideas can be used to doubt the ideas of ethical relativism. Kant made a significant input into the moral philosophy. All his philosophical inquiry is based on the idea of existence of universal moral truth, or Categorical Imperative. It can be opposed to moral relativism.  “So act as to treat humanity, whether is your own person or in that of any other, in every case as an end never as merely a means only” (Pojman, 2006, p. 450).  Kant describes  categorical imperative as the main driving force of moral judgement. Kant underlines that every moral action should be viewed not only as the principle, but also as the end.   This thesis underlines that all people possess intrinsic moral knowledge and that is the reason they should be treated equally. Nobody should become the means to reach somebody’s goal. Every person possesses inner feeling of right and wrong and should possess ability to realize his inner nature.   It has practical implication. Kant does not only describe the origin of moral values and moral behavior, but also gives guidelines of moral behavior. Kant formulates basic principles of humanity, and these principles do not only speak  about the nature of humanity, but also show  how this attitude can be applied in everyday life.  Kant uses complicated philosophical categories to speak about morals and humanity. At the same time, his principles are still up to date and describe foundations of moral behavior. He underlines that people should be treated  “never as merely a means only,” and this principle presents the idea of liberty and equality. Kantian categorical imperative becomes the powerful tool, which can be used to explain not only complicated philosophical ideas, but also basic humanistic principles and ethical values. The second formulation of the categorical imperative centers on practical implication. It shows how the knowledge about the categorical imperative can be applied in people’s everyday lives and how it can be used as the moral foundation in their relations. Kant uses the categories of free will and rational actions.

Ideas expressed by Rene Descartes can also be compared to ethical relativism. Descartes speaks about  fallacies of sensual perceptions   and looks for the ways to define things, which are really true and can not be doubted. He chooses the path of doubting everything. Rational doubt is a famous term which distinguishes  his philosophical credo. Descartes puts under doubt all concepts of the mind. Using these concepts, he finally finds the only thing which cannot be doubted. This thing is a doubt itself. The fact that the person doubts becomes a proof that this person exists. “Cogito ergo sum” is an expression which states that the doubt itself becomes the proof of existence.  Only knowledge of the person’s existence cannot be doubted, while other constructs of the human brain can be deceptions.  In the movie this fact is illustrated with the help of different mental constructions, which help the protagonist to come in terms with his guilt for murdering a person and returning back to normal and happy living. Descartes with his rational doubt rejects any Universal knowledge. He is sure that organs of perception can change the information. In his example about the Evil Genius, Descartes   speaks about some Omni powerful  Evil Genius who decides to deceive people and convinces them to feel things he wants them to feel. At this point there is no opportunity to check up, whether our sensory experience is a true one or only a result of deception. This metaphor helps Descartes formulate the theory of rational doubt. Finally, he puts under doubt all universal notions, including moral norms and regulations. At the same time Descartes voluntary choose to follow social, religious and some other regulations because he believes them to be the most effective patterns of behavior. By this decision he deliberately proves that there are moral patterns, shared by the majority of people and these patterns serve for common good. Despite his rational doubt, Descartes finally agrees to follow moral norms and regulations, including religious ones, presented in the contemporary society.

Ethical relativism is ethical theory which  questions all moral norms and regulations. Such an approach can be dangerous, because it leaves people without moral guidelines and thus can become the reason of immoral and unethical behavior. People’s will and desires can be subjective. That is the reason people can make wrong choices and perform wrong actions.  The idea about the categorical imperative gives universal moral guidelines for all people. All people possess  knowledge about  moral values. This value is common for all of them. That the reason all people should be treated with respect and dignity.

References

Rachels, J. (1989). “Egoism and Moral Skepticism,” Vice and Virtue in Everyday Life: Introductory Readings in Ethics, ed.by Christina Hoff Sommers and Fred Sommers, San Diego, CA: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Mackie, J.L. (1977) Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong, London: Penguin Books.

Kenny, Anthony (1968). Descartes: A study of his Philosophy. New York: Random House,.

Munzel, G. Felicitas, (1999). Kant’s Conception of Moral Character: The “Critical” Link of Morality, Anthropology, and Reflective Judgment, University of Chicago Press.

Plato, Theaetetus, translation by Benjamin Jowett. http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/theatu.html

Pojman, Louis, (2006). Philosophy: The Quest for Truth, Oxford University Press.

The terms offer and acceptance. (2016, May 17). Retrieved from

[Accessed: March 29, 2024]

"The terms offer and acceptance." freeessays.club, 17 May 2016.

[Accessed: March 29, 2024]

freeessays.club (2016) The terms offer and acceptance [Online].
Available at:

[Accessed: March 29, 2024]

"The terms offer and acceptance." freeessays.club, 17 May 2016

[Accessed: March 29, 2024]

"The terms offer and acceptance." freeessays.club, 17 May 2016

[Accessed: March 29, 2024]

"The terms offer and acceptance." freeessays.club, 17 May 2016

[Accessed: March 29, 2024]

"The terms offer and acceptance." freeessays.club, 17 May 2016

[Accessed: March 29, 2024]
close
Haven't found the right essay?
Get an expert to write you the one you need!
print

Professional writers and researchers

quotes

Sources and citation are provided

clock

3 hour delivery

person