Absolutism vs Relatirism Essay

857 Words4 Pages
fundamental difference between the ethical perspectives relativism and absolutism relativism * the moval rightness and wrongness of actions varies from society to society there are no absolute unibersal moral standads binding on all people at all the times , There is a fact of the matter as to whether any given action is morally permissible or impermissible: a fact of the matter that does not depend solely on social custom or individual acceptance ,but it always be relative to the historical, cultural .feeling .consequences and social context * Subjectivism. * Teleological * Situationism . Subjectivism: * Ethical subjectivism holds that moral statements can be propositions, but that they describe the attitudes of an individual agent rather than something social, cultural or objectively universal. All moral statements are true if the person stating them believes them t0 be true. * Jean-Paul Sartre promoted ethical subjectivism as a form of moral relativism. For Sartre, social conventions are an important part of governing one's conduct, but only one's individual moral identity had any real authenticity as a source of moral truth. http://www.philosophy-index.com/ethics/meta-ethics/subjectivism.php Teleological * The word "teleology" is derived from the Greek word "telos" that means "ends, it would consider the ends, or the outcomes of personal decision. Since it is concerned about the consequences of the decision, it is also referred to as consequentialist. One of the most common branches of it is utilitarianism, which was discussed by Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill in the 19th century. A utilitarian considers an act right if it is useful in bringing about the best consequences overall. This theory can be utilized in clinical decision-making by first identifying what the dilemma entails and

    More about Absolutism vs Relatirism Essay

      Open Document