Principles Of People And Relativism

Principles of people and relativism

Introduction

According to the ethical position theory, individual differences in ethical judgments in individuals are based taking into account two basic factors: relativism and idealism (Schlenker and Forsyth). Relativism is the degree to which a subject does not have a tendency to adopt universal moral principles in his personal ethical system. For relativism, moral absolute must be rejected, and moral rules exist in a situational context, depending on factors such as time, place or culture. A person who is highly relativistic will believe that universal ethical codes or moral principles are not important when making ethical judgments.

Developing

This person will emphasize in their ethical analysis contextual factors. Meanwhile, those with low relativistic level will emphasize the importance of rigid adhesion to ethical codes, moral absolute when making moral judgments (Forsyth) The second factor is idealism, which is defined as the degree of concern of an individual for well -beingTo others. People with a high degree of idealism conceive that damage to others is avoidable and prefer not. On the other hand, people with less degree of idealism accept that sometimes damage to others will be necessary to produce good.

Thus, these two dimensions influence the trials of moral issues (Forsyth). For example, highly idealistic people always try to avoid damaging others and will not execute an action that has a negative impact on others.

On the other hand, a high degree of relativistic people feel that moral actions are situations and individual dependent, and by making decisions that consider the situation rather than the ethical principle that was violated. It is also important to point out that both dimensions are not dichotomous because they are conceptually different. Under this, people can have high degrees or low in both factors.

You can cross the two factors to give way to a taxonomy of four ethical positions where people can adopt one of those approaches that are situationism, absolutism, subjectivism and exceptionalism. Inclusion in one of these groups is determined in case a person adopts idealistic or non -idealistic values on the one hand, and creates moral rules are universal or not on the other hand. The situationists: the situationists are individuals who avoid universal moral principles, since they have a high relativism, but that insist that positive consequences that give benefit to all involved when a situation is evaluated that is an ethical nuance that is an ethical nuance that is an ethical nuance that is evaluated.

Subjectivists: these types of people have high relativism but under idealism. Given this, they reject universal moral rules, but unlike the situationists they have a selfish profile in which they are not oriented towards the benefit of others but their own interest. Absolutists have a low level of relativism and high level of idealism. They consider that one must strive to produce positive consequences and at the same time have a strict adherence to general moral principles. Therefore, they condemn the actions that on the one hand affect people and at the same time violate fundamental moral absolute.

conclusion

Exceptionists: According to ethical position theory, these people have a low degree of relativism and idealism. They believe in universal moral principles, however they also consider that sometimes these principles cause inevitable and justifiable damage, so these exceptions are allowed. For Forsyth contextualizes these positions in the business context giving examples in that environment. For example, when an entrepreneur must decide whether to retain or let an employee who violates a company rule, argues that a situationist will prefer to collect information before making a decision.