Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Meta-ethical moral relativism holds that moral judgments contain an (implicit or explicit) indexical such that, to the extent they are truth-apt, their truth-value changes with context of use. [1] [2] Normative moral relativism holds that everyone ought to tolerate the behavior of others even when large disagreements about morality exist. [3]
Moral absolutism is an metaethical view that some or even all actions are intrinsically right or wrong, regardless of context or consequence. [ 1 ] [ 2 ] Comparison with other ethical theories
Moral relativism encompasses the differences in moral judgments among people and cultures. [3] Epistemic relativism holds that there are no absolute principles regarding normative belief , justification , or rationality , and that there are only relative ones. [ 4 ]
Value-pluralism is an alternative to both moral relativism and moral absolutism (which Berlin called monism). [2] An example of value-pluralism is the idea that the moral life of a nun is incompatible with that of a mother, yet there is no purely rational measure of which is preferable. Hence, values are a means to an end.
As such, it is a form of moral relativism in which the truth of moral claims is relative to the attitudes of individuals [9] (as opposed to, for instance, communities). Consider the case this way — to a person imagining what it's like to be a cat, catching and eating mice is perfectly natural and morally sound.
Depending on the variety of moral relativism, these statements may be indexed to a particular society (i.e., cultural relativism, when I say stealing is wrong, it is only true if stealing is not acceptable in my culture), or indexed to an individual (individualistic relativism). [14] Furthermore, moral relativism is the view where an actor's ...
In moral philosophy, deontological ethics or deontology (from Greek: δέον, 'obligation, duty' + λόγος, 'study') is the normative ethical theory that the morality of an action should be based on whether that action itself is right or wrong under a series of rules and principles, rather than based on the consequences of the action. [1]
In the philosophy of ethics, moral anti-realism (or moral irrealism) is a meta-ethical doctrine that there are no objective moral values or normative facts. It is usually defined in opposition to moral realism , which holds that there are objective moral values, such that a moral claim may be either true or false.