Relativism-Stace-Summary

Relativism-Stace-Sum - Prather 1 Charlie Prather December 3 2007 T Bos Summary Ethical Relativism W.T Stace Ethical relativity is the ethical

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Prather 1 Charlie Prather December 3, 2007 T. Bos Summary: Ethical Relativism, W.T. Stace Ethical relativity is the ethical position that denies the belief that there is one ethical standard by which to live one’s life. The relativist believes that there are many, depending on specific factors. Relativists live with the belief that morality in one country, place, culture, or time can be completely different than that of another, but can still be accepted as being ethical. Certain people are attracted to relativism because they do not fully understand the concept. They lack the notion that there is a significant distinction between what is morally acceptable from country to country and age to age. Different times and places have different acceptable moral standards according to the relativist. When he speaks of moral standards in this sense, he is talking about what is socially accepted as being right whether or not it is really right or not. The absolutist has a completely different definition of the term standard. Standard to an absolutist is what is actually ethically right, not what is socially accepted as being right. The concept of absolutism is the fact that despite cultural, social, or acceptance based on the time period in which the subject lives, there is in fact a moral standard of all times and all places. The relativist doesn’t believe that what a Chinamen believes is correct is wrong for a Frenchmen, but he believe that what might really be right for one man, and correctly suites him, may not work for the other man. What is right in one country parallels what
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Prather 2 the people residing in that country also accept as being right, therefore in order to find out what is currently acceptable in a country, all one must do is find out about moral ideas and beliefs. What is morally right is actually what is thought to be morally right; therefore if one country believes one thing is moral, and another country’s beliefs are contradicting, then no one is right, and idea of one moral standard is completely gone. Different cultures or time periods often times have aspects that may seem extremely absurd to some, for example cannibalism, human sacrifice, and also the burning of widows, all of which were once socially accepted. The first argument is solely based upon the different varieties of moral standard found around the world. Before complex anthropological studies we could easily assume that there are in fact universal moral standards in which we could all live and abide by. There were the people of faith, and then the nonbelievers. The believers or “Christians”
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 04/16/2008 for the course ENG Philo taught by Professor Tim during the Fall '08 term at S.F. State.

Page1 / 6

Relativism-Stace-Sum - Prather 1 Charlie Prather December 3 2007 T Bos Summary Ethical Relativism W.T Stace Ethical relativity is the ethical

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online