Ethics Are Not Relative By Walter Terance Stace Essay

788 Words Dec 7th, 2015 4 Pages
Walter Terance Stace is an empirical philosopher who wrote the article, “Ethics Are Not Relative”, which asserts that “there is no single universal objective standard.” He presents us with two sides, that of the Ethical Relativist (left) vs. that of the Ethical Absolutist (right). The absolutists argue in one true moral code, and that there are no exceptions to this moral code, regardless if it’s contrary to one’s beliefs. While the relativist argues that there are many moral laws, codes, standards. Relativists state that a moral value “is relative to the age, the place, and the circumstance in which it is found.”
Stace first begins explaining how an ethical absolutist views morality. He seems to view absolutism as cut throat, leaving no room to explain differences in judgment, other than the assertion of ignorance. This separates us into two different classes of beings: those ignorant of the moral law, and those who acknowledge it. The ethical absolutist seems to believe that morality is not man-made; rather these moral principles are “real truths” which men have to learn. Stace explained that for an absolutist there is no one truly committed moral code. Morals change with time, and even if they did change, how are we to know if this change was the true one? Thus it’s concluded that absolutists hold what the majority acknowledges to be true; to be true for all, but they also rationalize that they can never truly know what is indeed moral and what is not.
Now for the…

Related Documents