Goodman's Moral Minima and the Challenge to Relativism
This paper examines Lenn E. Goodman's essay "Some Moral Minima," in which Goodman argues that certain acts — including terrorism, slavery, rape, and genital mutilation — are universally and absolutely wrong regardless of cultural context. The paper explores the challenges Goodman's position poses for moral relativism while also scrutinizing the internal tensions within his own deontological framework. Through analysis of specific examples such as genocide, wage labor, polygamy, incest, and rape, the paper questions whether Goodman's moral absolutes are as self-evident as he claims and concludes that, while universal moral standards may be difficult to establish empirically, the effort to construct such standards remains essential for protecting vulnerable populations.
- Introduction: Goodman's Case Against Moral Relativism: Goodman's moral absolutes amid cultural relativism
- Genocide, Terrorism, and the Problem of Intent: Critiquing Goodman's deontological treatment of violence
- Slavery, Polygamy, and the Grey Areas of Exploitation: Wage labor, kinship laws, and moral universality
- Rape, Genital Mutilation, and the Limits of Universality: Questioning cross-cultural consensus on bodily harm
- Conclusion: Moral Standards Without Self-Evident Truths: Need for protective standards despite moral uncertainty
✍️ How to write this paper — guide & tools ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper maintains a balanced critical stance — it neither dismisses Goodman's moral claims nor uncritically accepts them, consistently distinguishing between challenging a position and endorsing the practices it condemns.
- Concrete examples (the Revolutionary War, Stalin vs. Hitler, sweatshop labor, kinship laws) are used to test the limits of Goodman's generalizations, grounding abstract philosophical debate in real-world complexity.
- The paper correctly identifies Goodman's deontological orientation and uses that identification as a lens for subsequent critique, demonstrating analytical precision with ethical theory.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper exemplifies immanent critique — it evaluates Goodman's arguments on their own terms rather than simply opposing his conclusions. By accepting that the listed practices are morally troubling while questioning whether Goodman's justifications are airtight, the author shows how to engage philosophically with a text without misrepresenting it.
Structure breakdown
The paper moves through Goodman's moral categories sequentially — genocide and terrorism, then slavery and kinship taboos, then rape and mutilation — mirroring the structure of the source essay. Each section raises a specific objection before the conclusion synthesizes the tension between moral skepticism and the practical need for protective legal standards. This issue-by-issue organization makes the argument easy to follow and each sub-claim independently evaluable.
Introduction: Goodman's Case Against Moral Relativism
Given the increasing globalization of modern society, combined with the influence of postmodernism, moral relativism has become increasingly popular and accepted within the academy. However, according to Lenn E. Goodman's essay "Some Moral Minima," some things are simply wrong. Goodman writes: "All living beings make claims to life" (Goodman 2010: 88). In other words, to protect the sanctity of human life, it is sometimes necessary to establish certain absolute ground rules of morality that, regardless of cultural differences, must be obeyed. These include prohibitions against terrorism; hostage taking and the use of child soldiers; slavery, polygamy, and incest; and rape and female genital cutting (Goodman 2010: 88).
However, while these prohibitions may seem like moral common sense given the revulsion they inspire, a closer examination reveals that Goodman's rationales for focusing on these particular transgressions are somewhat problematic. This essay explores the specific challenges Goodman's arguments pose for relativism and questions whether his proposed universal moral requirements are as self-evident as he claims.
References
Goodman, Lenn. (2010). Some moral minima. The Good Society, 19(10): 87–94.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.