978-0133804058 Chapter 05

28

CHAPTER 5 – ABSOLUTISM VERSUS RELATIVISM

General Overview

The objective of this chapter is to acquaint students with the concepts and questions that pertain

to one of the most perplexing metaethical issues: is morality absolute or relative? This is

potentially a confusing topic for students and the either/or form of the question could be one of

the problems here. Thiroux’s text does help in breaking out of this. This chapter also presents an

opportunity for instructors to get students to think about the important relationship between facts

and values. Are any facts devoid of value? Students will often appeal to the way things are to

justify how they should be, especially in the later chapters on sexuality, nature, animals,

environment, etc., so a preparatory discussion of it now might be useful.

Those instructors new to the text will note that the author begins to describe Thiroux’s moral

framework (developed more fully in Chapter 8) and instructors face a choice about whether they

will run along with it or sit back and question the text. With so much that is unsettled here the

choice is between giving students something they can hold onto – recognizing that these

principles are in principle always open to question – or letting students swim (or sink) for

themselves.

Class Suggestions

This topic may present quite a challenge to instructors since many students will already believe a

version of relativism – sometimes picked up from other classes in sociology and anthropology.

Students from religious backgrounds will sometimes espouse an equally inflexible commitment

to absolutes. The challenge then is to get those on the extreme ends thinking hard about and

questioning their own and each others’ positions just as much as getting those somewhere in the

“soft middle” to not think that they have all the right answers, especially when the answer here is

all too often a preformed liberalism which says that “so long as it doesn’t harm anybody, then

it’s okay” which conceals a multitude of problems. With this topic very contemporary examples

can be used that students perhaps wouldn’t ordinarily think about in any concerted way. For

example, you might ask is there such a thing as “American values”? Are they true only in

American culture? How do these values differ from values and practices found in other parts of

the world? You could develop these questions into a discussion of September 11th, the recent war

in Iraq, treatment of women in various parts of the world (e.g., female circumcision in parts of

Africa, “widow burning” in India, etc.) and so on.

Chapter Summary

Is Morality Absolute or Relative?

The Meanings of Absolute

Absolute means variously perfect, complete, and certain. However, it is difficult to prove an

absolute supernatural being exists or the presence of absolutes (laws) in nature, let alone “natural

moral laws.”

29

The Meaning of Relative

Relativism: Values are relative to time, place, persons, situations etc.; no values are absolute or

independent of cultures and peoples.

Cultural Relativism and Cultural Absolutism

Cultural Relativism

1. Studies by anthropologists reveal wide variation in customs, mores, practices, etc.

2. Moral beliefs derive from culture.

3. Different cultures believe that their morality is the one true morality.

Cultural Absolutism

1. Similar moral principles exist in all societies, e.g,. prohibition on murder, truth telling, etc.

2. All peoples have similar needs.

3. Similarities in situations and relationships across cultures, e.g., families, brothers and sisters.

4. Similarities in sentiment, jealousy, emotion, love, need for respect, etc.

Evaluation of These Theories

Moral Relativism:

Because cultures disagree does not mean that a particular belief cannot be right or wrong.

Moral Absolutism:

Similarities in societies does not suggest the existence of absolutes. Because people and

situations exist or behave in certain ways tells us little about what should or ought to be the case.

It appears that if absolutism is true then relativism is false and vice versa. If absolutism is true

how do we resolve the issue of conflict between them?

Propositions and Truth

Propositions and States of Affairs

Propositions are true or false statements regarding states of affairs. States of affairs are

occurrences, events, or happenings that either occurs or not. They cannot be true or false.

Are There Any Absolute Truths?

Truth is not dependent or contingent upon our ability to know at a given time. Truth is based on

whether state of affairs occurs.

30

Types of Propositions

Analytic propositions:

Logical truths – law of non-contradiction, excluded middle, identity, etc. True by definition of

terms.

Internal Sense Propositions:

Propositions that assert something of our internal states. True by experience.

Empirical Propositions:

State of affairs that occurs in the external world. True by evidence of the senses.

Moral Propositions:

Propositions that have moral import, e.g., abortion is evil. Generally, but not always, these

propositions contain words like should, ought, right, good, etc.

Emotive Theory

If some propositions are absolutely true by virtue of logic or experience, are moral propositions

ever absolute?

Some claim that morals are non-cognitive or “emotional” having no basis in fact.

Problems with the Emotive Theory:

John Hospers has pointed out discrepancies. Moral propositions can have:

1. Purpose or intention

2. Effects on hearers

3. Actual meaning

If a moral proposition can have these attributes then not all moral propositions are solely

emotive. Emotivist theory exaggerates its claims.

Moore’s Naturalistic Fallacy:

If we say moral propositions are not any different from empirical propositions we are committing

the “naturalistic fallacy,” i.e, trying to get an “ought” from an “is.” However, some moral

propositions can be clearly and logically inferred from empirical propositions (example of

AIDS).

31

Moral Propositions as Types of Empirical Propositions

Perhaps moral propositions are empirical propositions with value judgments.

Normative Moral Statements:

Some possibility that “he is a good man” could be thought similar to “that is a green table”?

Prescriptive Moral Statements:

Can prescriptive moral claims be thought true or false? Some prescriptive non-moral statements

(chess example) appear to assert something about reality, i.e., are true or false.

Propositions Against Killing Human Beings:

Could we make some case for moral propositions? Perhaps propositions against killing human

beings is “best case scenario.”

Problems with Moral Propositions:

Tension between true propositions and human action and between propositions that conflict. But

perhaps all moral theories require some absolute.

Near or Almost Absolutes

Perhaps the best to aim for are near or almost absolutes making sure we justify all the exceptions.

Conclusion

Relativism

Are people relativists in real situations? Most will qualify this statement. What does the need to

supply or add rules to relativism tell us? Our practical lives seem to conflict with our relativist

theories.

Absolutism

There are absolutes in the sense of absolutely true propositions. From some of these we may

derive “near or almost absolutes” that are moral principles “don’t kill another human being” that

provide basic foundations. Each exception must be carefully justified.

KEY TERMS AND CONCEPTS

Absolutism

Relativism

Culture

External

Emotivism

Reason

32

History

Anthropology

Truth

Propositions

States of Affairs

Analytic

Internal

Moral Propositions

Is/Ought

Naturalistic Fallacy

Normative

Prescriptive

Justification

Near or Almost Absolutes

ESSAY QUESTIONS

1. What are the problems associated with absolute conceptions of morality? Do the “facts”

suggest that these problems could be overcome?

2. Are you a relativist? Explain why or why not, making sure that you look at arguments for and

against.

3. What is the Emotive theory? Explain the advantages and disadvantages of holding such a view.

4. Analyze Moore’s naturalistic fallacy. Is Moore right?

5. Is morality absolute or relative? Give examples and justify your view.

TRUE/FALSE

1. Relativism is the belief that morality is relative to time, place, situation, people, culture, etc.

2. All anthropologists are cultural absolutists.

3. Because a view in one culture is different from another does not mean that either view is

right or wrong.

4. One problem with relativism, according to the author of the text, is that it does not enable us

to be critical.

5. There is only one type of moral proposition.

6. According to the author of the text, truth is relativistic.

7. Emotivism is the view that moral statements have only noncognitive meaning.

8. According to the author of the text, moral propositions are analytic propositions.

9. A problem with absolutes is what to do when they conflict.

10. A “near absolute” means almost moral but not quite.

MULTIPLE CHOICE

11. Similar moral principles exist in all societies is a view supported by

a) relativists.

b) absolutists.

c) colonialists.

d) deconstructionists.

12. Relativists hold that morals are relative to

a) culture.

b) individuals.

c) situations.

d) all of the above.

33

13. An example of a moral proposition is

a) “I feel sick.”

b) “You should not treat people badly.”

c) “Nothing can be both A and not A.”

d) “Her hair is brown.”

14. Who claims that some empirical propositions are absolutely true or false?

a) Jacques Derrida

b) Norman Malcolm

c) Marquis de Sade

d) Adolf Hitler

15. The theory of emotivism states that

a) all emotions in morals are bad.

b) emotions in morality must be balanced with reason.

c) moral propositions only express feelings.

d) we should get back in touch with our emotions.

16. Who stated the “naturalistic fallacy” in ethics?

a) John Hospers

b) Aristotle

c) G.E. Moore

d) J. S. Mill

17. The problem of “getting an ought from an is” means

a) what you should do is determined by how you feel.

b) what you ought to do is often very difficult.

c) what people should do has no necessary connection to what they actually do.

d) what people like to do is actually what they in fact do.

18. Who says that there are moral “near or almost absolutes” that form the basic principles of

moral life?

a) Thiroux

b) Hospers

c) Kant

d) Sting

19. The greatest problem in the absolutism/relativism debate is how to introduce

a) courage and honesty.

b) freedom and liberty.

c) stability and creativity.

d) reason and evidence.

34

20. Exceptions to absolutes must

a) be carefully concealed.

b) not exist.

c) be fully justified.

d) not be contemplated.

Answer Key to Chapter 5 Test Questions

True or False :

Multiple Choice :