absolutism vs relativism...?

Question

Which ethical position is correct, absolutism or relativism? Why? In your discussion, consider the arguments for and against both

Answer 1

One's postition depends on specifics: as, situation, conditions, motive, level of knowledge, and more. (a relative answer, right?)
An absolute: violence begets violence; lieing begets distrust; justice is good, etc.

Now you do the work.

Answer 2

"traditionally, Christians of maximum flavors, observed a code that could say that there are ethical absolutes. " There have in no way been ethical absolutes. those comparable Christians you declare existed have been additionally a similar ones who bought products that have been meant to forgive sins. there is not any question that up until a strategies is formed that the newborn isn't something better than a clump of cells. or you're saying you besides mght shouldn't kill epidermis cells by using sunbathing. there is not any gay schedule, end mendacity. no one is asserting divorce is physically powerful. each and every thing you declare is fake. edit: Then there are additionally examples interior the bible itself that time out that ripping the unborn newborn from the mummy is advantageous, thoroughly negating the whole argument that that's undesirable. Edit2: And interior the bible the place it needless to say states existence does not initiate until breath is taken? ethical relativism. so which you heavily do not comprehend the kind between radicals and non-radicals and that's what you base your schedule off of? I editted above so which you recognize what i became pertaining to, I care not something of perfection merely hypocrisy. merely face it, there are no ethical absolutes and there in no way have been. Edit to Michael C: Oh ok specific the APA replaced this is perspectives on homosexuality, nicely then permit's learn what they say approximately delusions. YEP! thought on your god is a fantasy yet they have the caveat that faith can't be construed that way. in step with hazard because of fact they did not opt to offend you deluded human beings? Are you relatively idiotic adequate to not understand that homosexuality have been recent in over 1500 different animal species there by using indicating this is not a psychological problem? As for breaking down morals, you as quickly as lower back teach your idiocy by using not bearing in strategies ethical relativism it is what this question is without postpone approximately. Edit To Michael C lower back: "Who do you think of is at the back of all the uproar as a effect of California Prop 8? " So for some reason you think of this is okay to not enable a definite sect of persons to have rights and you think of they gained't be unhappy approximately it? permit me wager, you placed on a white pointy hat on the weekends?

Answer 3

Absolutism does, as one other person pointed out, have fewer problems. Yet, more importantly, it is the foundation from which we learn and judge and evaluate. Moral absolutes must be the foundation of good society. Otherwise, the inconsistency of applying right and wrong would lead to chaos.
I am not taking this discussion into politics. In the judicial side, we must hold to moral and legal absolutes. God set up those absolutes for our protection.

Answer 4

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativism

"Relativism consists of various theories each of which claims that some element or aspect of experience or culture is relative to, i.e., dependent on, some other element or aspect. For example, some relativists claim that humans can understand and evaluate beliefs and behaviors only in terms of their historical or cultural context. The term often refers to truth relativism, which is the doctrine that there are no absolute truths, i.e., that truth is always relative to some particular frame of reference, such as a language or a culture."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universality_%28philosophy%29

"Universality is opposed to relativism in philosophy. Truth may be said to be universal, as well as rights, for example in natural rights or in the 1789 Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, heavily influenced by the philosophy of the Enlightenment and its conception of a human nature. The 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights is inspired by the same principles. A proposition is said to have universality if it can be conceived as being true in all possible contexts without creating a contradiction. Some philosophers have referred to such propositions as universalizable. Truth is considered to be universal if it is valid in all times and places. In this case, it is seen as eternal or as absolute. The relativist conception denies the existence of universal truths - although they are, of course, grades of relativism: most relativists deny the existence of universal moral values, which make them moral relativists, but few deny the existence of universal truths when mathematics are concerned. In other words, since truth has various domains of application, relativism does not necessarily apply to all of them."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolutism

"Absolutism can mean:

Absolute truth (also known as 'absolutism'), the contention that in a particular domain of thought, all statements in that domain are either absolutely true or absolutely false
Enlightened absolutism, a term used to describe the actions of absolute rulers who were influenced by the Enlightenment (eighteenth and early nineteenth century Europe)
Moral absolutism, the position that there are absolute standards against which moral questions can be judged, and that certain actions are good or evil, regardless of the context of the act
Autocracy (also known as 'political absolutism'), a political theory which argues that one person should hold all power
Absolute monarchy, a form of government where the monarch has the power to rule their land freely, with no laws or legally-organized direct opposition in force
a theory of space (see Philosophy of space and time#Absolutism vs. relationalism) holding that space exists absolutely, in contrast to relationalism, which holds that space exists only as relations between objects "


The Will is positive, the Judgment is negative. Both relativism and absolutism are correct but do not universalize their selves. It is not so much, as in Christianity, as to the question 'is it sin or not for this purpose' but 'is it forgivable for this purpose and any purpose'. Most would say 'not any'.

Answer 5

extended relativism has its flaw in that it claims no absolutes - but yet that itself is an absolute - but extended absolutism merely appears to devolve into complexities that cannot be resolved easily - so either we lack the facilities to understand absolutism correctly - or it is wrong as well

However if one must choose one or the other then absolutism has less problems

Answer 6

Relativism; because we're all rowing in different ways from different positions, but we're all still in the same boat.