Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Moral universalism (also called moral objectivism) is the meta-ethical position that some system of ethics, or a universal ethic, applies universally, that is, for "all similarly situated individuals", [1] regardless of culture, race, sex, religion, nationality, sexual orientation, gender identity, or any other distinguishing feature. [2]
Moral relativism or ethical relativism (often reformulated as relativist ethics or relativist morality) is used to describe several philosophical positions concerned with the differences in moral judgments across different peoples and cultures. An advocate of such ideas is often referred to as a relativist.
Moral universalism (also called moral objectivism or universal morality) is the meta-ethical position that some system of ethics applies universally.That system is inclusive of all individuals, [7] regardless of culture, race, sex, religion, nationality, sexual orientation, or any other distinguishing feature. [8]
Relativism is a family of philosophical views which deny claims to objectivity within a particular domain and assert that valuations in that domain are relative to the perspective of an observer or the context in which they are assessed. [1]
Relativism concerning morals is known as moral relativism, a philosophical stance opposed to the existence of universal moral values. The claim for universal values can be understood in two different ways. First, it could be that something has a universal value when everybody finds it valuable.
In philosophy, universality or absolutism is the idea that universal facts exist and can be progressively discovered, as opposed to relativism, which asserts that all facts are relative to one's perspective. [1] [2] Absolutism and relativism have been explored at length in contemporary analytic philosophy.
The general concept or principle of moral universalizability is that moral principles, maxims, norms, facts, predicates, rules, etc., are universally true; that is, if they are true as applied to some particular case (an action, person, etc.) then they are true of all other cases of this sort.
Like Kantian ethics, discourse ethics is a cognitive ethical theory, in that it supposes that truth and falsity can be attributed to ethical propositions. It also formulates a rule by which ethical actions can be determined and proposes that ethical actions should be universalizable, in a similar way to Kant's ethics. [52]