Relativist Ethics
- Created by: bella5437869
- Created on: 04-04-20 08:48
View mindmap
- Relativist Ethics
- right/ wrong depends on the situation
- teleological
- doesn't allow the condemnation 'evil' actions
- situation ethics is a relativist theory
- different cultures/ periods in history have different moral rules
- examples
- pros/ cons
- plausible way of explaining how ethics fit into the world as it is described by modern science
- tolerant/ respectful of different societies
- best explanation of the variability of moral belief/ in line with how the world works, e.g. different opinions, cultures
- morality as a social nicety, little reason to be moral other than to fit in
- fliexible
- explains the virtue of tolerance, can objectively look at and accept others' differing values
- no absolute God- people can make own decisions
- 'slippery slope'- one step away from subjectivism
- implies we can't criticise Holocaust, witch burning etc. allows for no evaluation/ criticism of bad things due to differing attitudes
- doesn't allow progress, no requirement to better society
- right/ wrong depends on the situation
- Herodotus, greek historian, different societies have different customs and they all think they own customs are best
- no set of social customs is better or worse than any other
- examples
- no 'cultural neutral standard' to which we can appeal to determine if something is correct so nothing is really 'right'
- Scottish Philospopher, David Hume
- moral beliefs are based on sentiment rather than reason
- 'emotivism', right and wrong are relative to individual preferences rather than to social standards
Comments
No comments have yet been made