Moral Realism vs. Moral Relativism
Philosophers have argued the merits or existence of moral realism and moral relativism for some time. Generally, the argument is designed as an either or proposition, where only one argument can be true. This is not necessarily true when one takes the time to explore what is meant by moral realism vs. moral relativism (Streitfeld). Essentially, moral realism is an objective view while moral realism is a subjective view (Streitfeld)

Moral realism holds that a thing is either right or it is wrong (Kim). Further, a moral realist would aver that there are never extenuating circumstances that would change whether or not a something is right or wrong (Kim). In other words, there are moral facts which govern us all, and regardless of what the social or cultural setting is, that fact can never waiver (Kim). It cannot waiver because it is a fact, not a subjective….

Then morality is relative, not absolute (Kreeft)
Weaknesses

One weakness of moral relativism consists of the consequences of not having moral constraints (Kreeft 2003). Correct or good morality, if valid, should always have good consequences. Incorrect or bad morality should always have bad consequences. The fact is that all wrong or immoral acts and attitudes bring on "good" or pleasant feelings. Moral relativism has never produced people worthy of praise. It has never produced good societies. History proves that the societies founded by Moses and Confucius lasted longer than those by Mussolino and Mao Tse Tung and that moral societies endure (Kreeft).

Tradition is not on the side of moral relativism. Moral absolutism is, in fact, the traditional morality (Kreeft 2003). It may be commonly thought that tradition is for snobs, but these snobs are really few and a minority. The truth of the matter is that absolutism has remained the norm….

Rule-breakers received swift punishment. Deviation from the norm was not tolerated by law or by social convention. Just because a moral standard helps create a stable society does not mean that moral standard is just, good, or right. Finally, the use of coercion itself denotes an unnatural moral standard. It takes relatively little coercion to ensure that most people don't murder or steal. Most children internalize the types of moral standards that Rachels generally accepts as universal. By extension, some moral standards may be universal throughout time.
Rachels indirectly distinguishes between moral relativism and cultural relativism. Moral relativism assumes the total lack of universal ethical truths, the lack of any benchmark to measure right and wrong. Cultural relativism may refer to behaviors, customs and traditions that do not carry any moral stigma. Preferring potatoes over corn, or goat meat over chicken, is one way of describing cultural relativism that is….

Pollack. There has to be a time when people are willing to stand for what is right and in their beliefs. Unfortunately, time has proven that great losses come from standing behind a belief system or truth that is not held by all individuals involved. Conclusively, one would feel that punishment and lose is the payment for stepping out of the box, and pointing out errors, indiscretions etc. The question becomes, is honesty really the best policy? In Dr. Pollack's opinion, the answer is and will remain to be yes. He stood by his beliefs regardless of his losses, which were extreme, especially considering the fact he was trying to do right by the customer, and correct the errors that were taking place. Instead, he personally lost a substantial part of his salary and was demoted, not many people would have done that.
eference

Nara Schoenberg, "A Man of Principle," 1/25/04,….

Similarly, when a member of society becomes too feeble to contribute, leaving them in the snow is deemed the proper solution. Both practices are deemed proper, as they increase the survival chances of the tribe as a whole. Thus, while another society may cringe at the idea of infanticide and leaving the elderly to die, Eskimo societies see the survival of the tribe as the paramount concern.
There are many examples throughout history illustrating the difficulty of judging other cultures by one's own ethical yardstick. Thus, instead of being preoccupied with questions of whose society is superior, moral relativists believe that all actions should be judged within their cultural context. An action such as infanticide, no matter how abhorrent it may seem, may then be an ethical action in a society that values collective survival over the rights of one individual..

elativism
n "Some Moral Minima," Lenn Goodman argues things simply wrong. Do Goodman ? Using specific examples, explore challenges Goodman presents relativism. Determine universal moral requirements, defend answer.

Moral minima: Goodman's arguments against relativism

Given the increasing globalization of modern society, combined with the influence of postmodernism, the philosophy of 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 'just wrong.' Goodman writes: "All living beings make claims to life" (Goodman 2010: 88). In other words, to protect the sanctity of human life, sometimes it is necessary to lay down certain absolute ground rules of morality that, regardless of cultural differences, must be obeyed. These include prohibiting: terrorism; hostage taking and child warriors; slavery, polygamy, and incest; and rape and female genital cutting (Goodman 2010: 88).

However, while these ideas may seem like 'no brainers' in terms of the….

One relativistic belief that I find that some people hold is regarding abortion. Some people say, “Well, I would never have one,” implying that there is something immoral or unjustified about the action (at least in their case), and then they will follow that up with a statement like, “But I don’t think other people should be denied the right to have one,” suggesting that there is in fact nothing immoral or unjustifiable about it. This appears to me to be a case of, “What’s not good for me is not necessarily bad for you.” While some philosophers, like Kant, might argue that relativism is part of understanding how morality must be viewed in individual cases, other philosophers will suggest that just as there is a subjective side to judgment there is also an objective side to judgment and that some actions can be judged objectively as immoral, even if….

Seeing how the Prime Directive should no longer apply, Picard was free to do whatever was necessary in order to save his crewman. However, the advanced technology employed by the aliens forced Picard to argue for the life of Wesley Crusher. His argument centers around the idea that this conflict is over whether or not moral universalism, or moral relativism would apply in the case of Wesley Crusher. Picard argues that the Federation does not interfere with other cultures because they believe that all cultures have equally value and the capacity for development. However, they are dealing with an alien race that is violating that principle. The aliens have decided that their moral universalism is correct for the Edo, and by extension, anyone who visits their planet. But Picard argues, correctly, that each culture must respect the rights of other cultures to develop in their own way. And the Prime….

Like Midgley, Bailey would expect the company to conduct its opeations and make the same decisions that would be equied in its native society. Moe impotantly, Bailey would likely also ague that the company has a moal duty to espond to the situation even if it wee the case that its native society ecognized no such moal obligation.
Both Bailey and Midgley would pobably equie the company to conside the natue of the hams caused by its poduct and to take easonable measues to pevent those hams completely iespective of any obligation o expectation in that egad by any society. Thei view would be that moality is a matte of objective pinciple and not subjective values and that allowing the types of hams descibed as a esult of pofit-making entepises is always immoal and always imposes a moal obligation, by objective pinciple, on the manufactue to take appopiate measues to….

Moral Minima" by Lenn E. Goodman. (2010) The Good Society 19(1): 87-94
Discussion of morality is almost always contentious. Who defines morality? Whose morality is it? Can one culture's morality be imposed on another's? Can the Westerners judge non-Westerns based on Western understandings of morality and vice versa? These are obviously legitimate questions. Philosophers, social scientists, human rights activists, politicians, and even criminals engage in this debate. In the last sixty years, advocates of diversity and respect for all cultures have condemned old colonial and racial classifications of the world, arguing that cultural practices of different nations must be analyzed and understood within the context of these specific nations. These people are generally called "moral relativists," especially by critics of such a view. Critics argue that moral relativism is morally bankrupt and that it ends up justifying abhorrent practices around the world. They argue that there are certain practices that….

Moral Community: A group in America that is clearly being marginalized politically and socially is the community of undocumented immigrants. An estimated 11.1 million immigrants are living and working in the United States, and notwithstanding that the U.S. Senate and the executive branch have passed a bill allowing undocumented immigrants a path to citizenship, the Republicans resist supporting this legislation. Cultural relativism helps to understand why 11.1 million people are being denied the right to work towards citizenship. Cultural relativism: the beliefs of one culture (in this case, those immigrants that are not yet citizens) should also be understood by others (in this case conservatives don't relate to the cultural beliefs of immigrants and vice-versa). A conservative "moral argument" is that there are a limited amount of goods and jobs in the U.S. And immigrants take these away from citizens here legally, but cultural bias and racism also certainly play….

elativism and Mortality
Goodman and elativism

For centuries, philosophers have debated the nature of our ethics and laws. Many have seen them as a relative concept, under the structure of relativism, where there is no universal foundation for the structure of ethics and law because individual societies differ so dramatically and should have their own ethical structures relative to their unique needs and structures. However, Lenn E. Goodman tends to disagree with this concept as seen in contemporary practice, stating that such a philosophy leaves the environment too open for interpretation and impractical for modern use, and as such some concepts within in relativism are simply off track.

elativism is a concept within philosophy and ethics that asserts there is no specific universal truth or need. ather, as each society varies, so do its own unique truths and needs. In this regard, the ethics, laws, and assertions within each society should vary in….

Such differences may lead us to question whether there are any universal moral principles or whether morality is merely a matter of "cultural taste" (Velasquez, Andre, Shanks and Meyer: 1).
If there is no transcendent ethical or moral standard, then cultural relativists argue that culture becomes the ethical norm for determining whether an action is right or wrong. This ethical system is known as cultural relativism. Cultural relativism is the view that all ethical truth is relative to a specific culture. hatever a cultural group approves is considered right within that culture. Conversely, whatever a cultural group condemns is wrong (Relativism: 2).

The key to the doctrine of "cultural relativism" is that right and wrong can only be judged relative to a specified society. There is no ultimate standard of right and wrong by which to judge culture. Proponents of cultural relativism believe this cultural diversity proves that culture alone is….

Legislating Morality
The ideas of Thomas Hobbes, the influential English philosopher who lived in the late 1500s to middle 1600s, are still considered important today. Hobbes is best remembered for his ideas on political philosophy. While Hobbes throughout his life championed the idea of absolutism for the sovereign he also is responsible for many of the fundamentals of Western political thought such as equality of men, individual rights, and the idea that all justifiable political power must be representative of the people (Edwards, 2002).

Hobbes also believed that human nature was such that people acted out of selfish-interests and if left to their own devices would do anything to get what they wanted or to acquire more power at the expense of others. Governments are then formed to shield people from their own selfishness; however he understood that even a King left unchecked would also act in a selfish manner at the….

Absolution vs. Relativism
Columnist illiam ineke points out that the real problem with relativism is that it gives no place to stop the slippery slide, no place to stand and say "no" (ineke pp). In other words, each step taken simply makes it easier to take the next step until, eventually, society finds no logical basis for saying "no" to anything (ineke pp). Yet, if the error of moral relativism is that it provides society with no real basis on which to say "no," then the error of objective morality is that it provides no real basis on which to say "yes" (ineke pp).

ineke uses the example of AIDS in Africa, citing Vatican ambassador to Zambia, Archbishop Orlando Antonini, who said "The use of condoms still constitutes a false solution to a real problem, although it is a burning issue in Africa" (ineke pp). However, ineke says, "millions of Africans are….

In this argumentative essay, we will critically analyze and assess the strengths and weaknesses of the divine command theory, ultimately arguing that morality should not be solely based on the commands of a divine being. One approach to crafting an impactful thesis statement on divine command theory is to focus on the implications of basing morality on divine commands. You could consider addressing the potential problems and limitations of this theory, such as the challenges of interpreting divine commands, the potential for moral relativism, and the issue of conflicting religious beliefs. By critically examining these aspects, you can make a strong....