Relativism and Morality - Assignment Example

? Relativism and Morality Relativism and Morality In many societies, morality is a controversial issue as it varies across different cultures and communities. Morality refers to acceptable behavior in a specific society or context. Alternatively, moral minima go hand in hand with the concept of morality. Moral minima are principles which members of society have to live by to be considered to be operating within the circles of upright moral conduct. Relativism is the argument that no action is wrong and each culture has the right to define what is right or wrong. Civilization has changed the concept of moral minima as morality can be explained in numerous ways depending on an individual’s perspective. We make moral decisions in everyday of our lives. Some are of importance while others are not; some are morally right while others are simply wrong. In morality, some things are regarded as being simply wrong. For instance, some crimes including murder, rape and human rights abuse are viewed as being simply wrong and cannot be justified on any moral grounds (Mosser, 2010). This paper seeks to explore Lenn Goodman’s argument that ‘certain things that are simply wrong’. Lenn Goodman States That There Are Certain Things That Are Simply Wrong. Do You Think Goodman Is Right? In his argument, Goodman asserts that there are four acts that fall into the category of universally recognized wrongs that are unacceptable social minima (Mosser, 2010). These acts are considered to be morally wrong regardless of the social and cultural background. I agree with Goodman’s argument that genocide, terrorism, slavery and rape are simply wrong. In the contemporary society, issues of gun ownership have generated much controversy over the years. The main question is whether the government has the right to restrict it. Some individuals think that it is as long as it is allowed by law. Additionally, gun ownership in the US is very high. From the utilitarianism point of view, it is considered to be wrong as it jeopardize the security of the society at large (Mosser, 2010). According to relativism, people are allowed to hold guns if they deem it to be right and they do not use them to harm others. The debate over prayer in public schools has generated public attention over the years. It should be allowed and public schools for moral and legal reasons. This is because the constitution stipulates that there should be no interference on religion matters. Thereby, prohibiting prayer in public schools is morally wrong and unconstitutional (Mosser, 2010). Allowing prayer has numerous benefits such as, religious values are inculcated in the students at a tender age and students are able to learn valuable moral teachings. Conversely, the US is a highly diverse country in terms of religious beliefs (Mosser, 2010). Therefore, by allowing prayer in public schools, the rights of minority groups will be imposed. In addition to, prayer might be vague and meaningless to those who profess a different religious view point. The major responsibility of schools is to offer quality education therefore dedicating time to prayer is not in their mandate and it is seen as an inefficient use of time. The other issue is concerning women’s rights to vote. In the past, women were not allowed and this denied them a fundamental right (Mosser, 2010). They were represented by other male members in society. It can be observed that women’s right to vote is a step in the right direction in the quest for equality but does not represent equality in itself. Other issues that are subject to moral relativism are individual rights in the work place and the debate over pornography. These two subjects have generated heated debate over the years since they are subject to varying understanding in various settings (Mosser, 2010). It can be argued that adults are allowed to make their own choices if the state finds no grounds to restrict it. Challenges Goodman Presents To Relativism His suppositions have been challenge by several thinks attempting to find fault in his argument. Giving consideration to the fact that all actions and behavior are subject to varying interpretations, Goodman’s ideas go against traditions and customs which are accepted in some communities. For example, by asserting that prayer in public schools is simply wrong is contentious (Mosser, 2010). In the US society, religious freedom is an important prerequisite in the constitution. One is allowed to pray so long as they do not interfere with other peoples activities. In a nutshell, prayer in public schools is considered to be right or wrong depending on the individual who is contending with it. In the same way, Goodman’s argument that female genital cutting is wrong is a subject matter depending on the customs and traditions (Mosser, 2010). However, it is a rite of passage in some African societies that is deeply entrenched in their customs. In conclusion, considering the rite of passage as an immoral act is divisive as it is a topic that is subject to different explanations. Likewise, gun ownership cannot be termed as legally and morally wrong if it is allowed by law and if it is used for the right purpose. Do Universal Moral Requirements Exist? From the above arguments it is apparent that universal moral requirements do not exist. In some instances behavior that is regarded as being gravely immoral in some societies is widely accepted to be right. The best example is terrorism which is viewed as being a heinous crime world over. This is because human life is sacred and taking it away through murder is a violation of the right to life. It is shocking that Muslim extremist justify terrorism acts as they are performed in the name of executing religious duties of the holy jihad (Mosser, 2010). In this chapter, it is clear that universal morals with regards to rights at the work place, gun ownership and pornography do not exist. Instead, it can be observed that they are all subject to moral relativism. From the above discussion it can be concluded that is practically impossible to have universally accepted and practiced moral minima. It is therefore easier said than done to agree with Goodman’s argument that there are universally morals. This is because it is difficult to come up with principles that will be accepted by people (Mosser, 2010). The assumption that no one is perfect also has it loop holes. It is inappropriate to stick to the ideologies of one individual blindly therefore moral relativism will always be linked to moral minima. Reference Mosser, K. (2010). Introduction to ethics and social responsibility. San Diego: Bridgepoint. Read More