Moral Relativism Essay

a) Explain what is meant by 'moral relativism'. (33)
b) Assess the strengths and weaknesses of moral relativism. (17)

a)
* "Moral relativism is the belief that morality does not relate to any absolute standards of right and wrong, but that 'good' and 'bad' are dependent on culture and circumstance." (Libby, Foundation for the Study of Religion, p. 50)
* The opposite of moral absolutism.
* Moral relativism - what is right for one person/culture/situation could be wrong for another. Everyone should be tolerant of each other.
* Today - emphasis on tolerance, multi-culturism, freedom of speech, individuality ...
* Cultural relativism - morality, religious belief, social behaviour ... ("When in Rome, do as the Romans do")
* Moral relativists - do not all share same views ... tend to believe that practical applications of right/wrong depend on circumstances.
* Some moral relativist systems - Social contract theory, Utilitarianism, Situation Ethics

b)
Strengths -
* Situation Ethics - based on what is the most loving action
* People have to take responsibility for their own moral decision-making
* Fits in with the popular individual way of thinking today
* Moral relativism has moved away from religious absolutism, which is perhaps more attractive to many people suspicious of fundamentalism today

Weaknesses -
* Nothing is condemned ... everything is allowed ... (eg is torture morally acceptable in any circumstance?)
* Is morality nothing more than what is socially acceptable?
* Taken to its logical conclusions, moral relativism is self-contradictory (eg ...)
* How do you view an intolerant view?
* Could be impractical (eg ...)
* James Rachels - all societies have some common principles (eg ... )
* Two people could look at the same situation and have good reasons for justifying different actions