Moral Relativism

Name
Professor
Course
Date
Moral Relativism
There is concrete evidence to support the moral relativism concept as noted in the cultural diversity of people. Xiao and Huang proposed that the difference in attitude implies that what is right or wrong depends on the specific situation (51-76). More so, universal morals are a matter of opinions rather than facts and thus, are considered non-verifiable. Criticism on relativism revolves on its endorsement of decadence. Nonetheless, I feel that Moral relativism is correct because it gives a realistic view of the world. Also, moral relativism is measurable on severity and dissimilar perspectives.
Moral relativism refers to a perspective which opposes absolutism in matters relating to ethical conductCITATION Luk11 p 21 l 1033 (Lukes 21). Despite the fact that different relativists have diverse ways of defining the term, two unique explanations give a general view of it. First of all, they all think that morality of a situation varies on the community and the person. What one community or person would view as right might be wrong to another and vice versa. Secondly, relativists assert that no perspective of morality is inferior or superior to the rest because every person believes that their understanding of morals is more logical than for others. In so doing, everyone is right and wrong at the same time depending on the specific community.
I completely agree with the arguments developed for moral relativism. Moral perspectives are products of emotions and sentiments for a given community.

According to Lukes the fact that there are numerous communities in the world implies that the possibility of different views of morality is realistic (32). Therefore, there is no clear procedure to ascertain what is objectively true in the world when it comes to values. A good example is the idea of slavery in the last few centuries. Many European countries were opposed to human slavery and wanted countries such as America to abolish it. At the same time, the owners of these slaves, the white population, viewed it as a normal and ethical practice. The same would apply to matters of religion. Some people think there is one God while others believe in many gods. These two sides can give substantial evidence to ground their proposals. I tried to oppose the idea of many gods and slavery but later realized that I was giving my opinion which is not necessarily true.
Another argument in support for moral relativism rests on the notion that some moral codes are not verifiable. If the statement placed forward for moral absolutism is just a matter of values, then the opposite might be true. Ethical relativism caters for the difference in culture, opinion, and degrees of relevance. Relativism caters for a hierarchy of needs. Basic needs such as food, clothing, and shelter surpass education and entertainment. They develop a morality which is measurable, unlike absolutism which relies on emotions of people. Pinker in his article The Moral Instinct Criticizes this philosophy by stating that it promotes immorality. A person might steal and beat people if he thinks they are inferior. An example is the above-mentioned slavery where one race committed atrocities against a minority group. If universal truths such as the dignity of human life irrespective of race, culture, and financial background were upheld, the idea of human genocide and slavery would be non-existence. In fact, the common belief among people about these morals led to the abolishment of slavery and situations leading to inhumane acts.
Conclusively, moral relativism is practical because it uses for cultural diversity to explain the realities of life. Different sub-populations indicate there is more than one view of ethical conduct. Moral absolutism caters for a morally upright life but relativism explains the realities of our existence.
Works Cited
BIBLIOGRAPHY l 1033 Xiao, Yang and Yong Huang. Moral Relativism and Chinese Philosophy: David Wong and His Critics. New York: SUNY Press, 2014.
Xiao and Huang developed a perspective of Moral Relativism with the views proposed by moral realists. They state that situations in life are a matter of moral framework. The general truths that people believe nowadays are as a result of opinion the majority. The right decision is that which many people support while the wrong one comes from the minority. Therefore, moral relativism is better explanation of morality that objective truth. In fact, ideas from moral relativism develop into objective truth with time.
Lukes, Steven. Moral Relativism. London: Profile Books, 2011.
Lukes creates a book which provides support and criticism for moral relativism and moral absolutism with the hope of coming up with a comprehensive solution. In the end, he outlines that each side can be incorporated depending on the situation. For matters of religion and governmental power, moral absolutism maintains a form of stability necessary for growth. When analyzing human behavior nowadays and in history, the concept of moral relativism becomes clear. People respond to situations under the influence of emotions and personal opinions whether they are aware of it or not.
BIBLIOGRAPHY l 1033 Pinker, Steven. “The Moral Instinct.” 13 January 2008. The New York Times. www.nytimes.com/2008/01/13/magazine/13Psychology-t.html. 25 November 2016.
Pinker identifies moral instinct as a sixth sense for people. He continues to suggest that some situations trigger the sense such as ideas of purity, authority, and danger. Most people are thought to make decisions with respective to emotions and their general attitude towards life. After identifies moral instinct as a sixth sense for people. He continues to suggest that some situations trigger the sense such as ideas of purity, authority, and danger. Most people are thought to make decisions with respective to emotions and their general attitude towards life.