1 / 20

Ethical Relativism

Ethical Relativism. Tiffany Schmit, Russ Turk, Alicia Dais. Ethical Relativism. “It’s all relative.” What’s right for you may not be right for me. Any moral opinion is as good as the next. Ethical Relativism. Holds three different views:

matt
Download Presentation

Ethical Relativism

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Ethical Relativism Tiffany Schmit, Russ Turk, Alicia Dais

  2. Ethical Relativism • “It’s all relative.” • What’s right for you may not be right for me. • Any moral opinion is as good as the next.

  3. Ethical Relativism Holds three different views: 1) Different groups of people ought to have different ethical standards for evaluating acts as right or wrong • Consider the issue of the Vatican covering up the instances of child abuse from Catholic Priests.

  4. Ethical Relativism Views Cont. 2) Different beliefs are true in their respective societies • Consider the national drinking age of America versus the drinking age in France.

  5. Ethical Relativism Views Cont. 3)Different beliefs are not instances of a basic moral principal • Consider slavery.

  6. Ethical Relativism • Ethical relativism prescribes the way people ought to behave, not the way they actually behave.

  7. Objections • The Differing Ideals Objection • Also known as the linguistic objection • It is inconsistent to say that the same practice is considered right in one society and considered wrong in another

  8. Differing Ideals Objection • The ethical relativist who makes the judgment that one society is better than another contradicts himself • Consider the judgment that present German state is a better society than Nazi Germany was in the 1940’s • To reach this conclusion, the relativist would need establish a “standard” by which to judge one society better than another. • This “standard” is what the relativist denies

  9. Counter-Objections to the Differing Ideals Objection • “right” and “wrong” have no consistent meaning – they only reflect emotion

  10. Mental Health Objection to Ethical Relativism • If “what is right in one group is wrong in another…” • Where exactly does one group end and another begin?

  11. Counter-Objection tothe Mental Health Objection • Right and wrong are to be determined in the situation • Right and wrong are to be determined by what the majority determine at the time and place • Right and wrong are ultimately established by power or authority

  12. Richard Brandt1910-1997

  13. Richard Brandt • believed that moral rules should be considered in sets which he called moral codes • A moral code is justified when it is the optimal code that, if adopted and followed, would maximize the public good more than any alternative code would. • The codes may be society-wide standards or special codes for a profession like engineering.

  14. Edward Westermarck1862-1939

  15. EdwardWestermarck • it is not a valid step to conclude from the influence culture has on what is judged to be right or wrong, that culture actually makes things right or wrong. • prescriptive ethics are what people ought to do

  16. Discussion • Consider an ethical dilemma of your own. Apply ethical relativism to your situation to help conclude what is right or wrong.

  17. Discussion • How did the Calvin apply ethical relativism to determine a New Year’s resolution?

  18. The End

More Related