Benefits Of Moral Relativism Undermine Moral Confidence

1084 Words 5 Pages
In this paper I will argue that moral relativism does undermine moral confidence and this is a benefit of the theory. The theory of relativism holds the beliefs that: moral truth is not out in the world waiting to be discovered, it is not universal, and that it is a product of history and culture. In turn morals in the theory of relativism are socially constructed ideals only holding value as long as they are part of a culture. The view that morals are only valuable within a cultural context is acceptable as there would be no moral value without culture. A similar example of this can be seen with the use of currency in cultures. The items used as currency within different cultures only have value because people within that culture have decided …show more content…
If morals are only true in the cultural context they are found in then individuals have no need to strongly defend those morals. People only face the obligation to be moral in accordance to their cultural norms as long as these systems serve the people. Viewing morals as nothing more than cultural norms promotes tolerance towards foreign viewpoints because viewing one 's own moral perspective not as an absolute truth but rather as simply the way things are done around here cause there to be no need to firmly defend one 's morals. The undermining of moral confidence caused by relativism is not a defect of the theory but rather a benefit because moral confidence isn 't always a beneficial. Confidence in an ideal can lead to arrogance. A person can have so much confidence in their viewpoint they then see their morals as superior to other moral systems. Arrogance can lead to intolerance of other moral systems. Viewing one 's own ideals as superior eliminates the possibility of considering others perspectives as they are perceived as inferior. Intolerance of foreign moral systems can lead to violence. Considering the use of violence to eliminate an opposing moral systems is easier to consider if that system is perceived as inferior to your own. A historical example of this occurring is during the crusades. During the crusades Muslims and Christians killed each other during massive bloody conflicts. …show more content…
Human beings are rational creatures that would intensitivity defend themselves. A Human Being would have no reason to place tolerance toward someone else 's morals over their own safety. For example society deems it immoral to kill other people but will deem it as an understandable action if it was done to protect oneself. The undermining of moral confidence that relativism can cause serves only to ensure that people do not approach a situation believing that they are morally superior but rather approach it with an open mind. Moreover, it is not clear people are less motivated about non-universal values beliefs. People may vigorously defend cooperation between cultures and condemn uncooperative cultures. If people were to look at other intolerant cultures that are attempting to disrupt such cooperation between cultures they would be motivated to defend these varying non-universal values. They would defend non-universal values because they would understand that there is no one truth only moral system, only moral systems that severe or do not serve the human

Related Documents

Related Topics