Moral relativism-there are
no universally valid moral
principals
and so there is no one truly moral
Ethical relativism takes
a deontological
approach
When there's no agreed set of
values, relativism can vary
attractive
Subjectivism-each person's value are
relative to that person and so cannot
be judged objectively
All principals and values are relative to a
particular culture or age
Culture relativism says right and wrong, good and evil are
relative to a culture,to a way of life practiced by a whole group
of people
We all make judgements about actions or
behaviour as being absolutely wrong in all
circumstances
we all make ethical
judgements about what we
consider to be right and
wrong, we all have different
views on ethical ethics
An ethical relativist believes believes that there are circumstances
and situations in which actions or behaviour that are usually
considered to be 'wrong' can be considered to be 'right'.
Cultural relativism says right and wrong, good and evil
are relative to a culture, to a way of life practiced by a
whole group of people
Individual relativism hold that there are no
universally valid moral principals
The problem today is that relativism tends to
lead people in to thinking that truth depends
on who holds it, or thet there's only one truth.
(their own)
Origions of relativism come from Socrates,
Plato, Aristotle, Sophist and Patagores
Ethical relativism ; X is accaptable
in the culure, suggests universal
tolerance, suggests morals are
just habits
can allow justification of anything. Comes from
anthology, moves from descriptive to normative.
Can allow justification of anything