Ariadne's Thread on Ethical Relativism
Replies
speaker
Fred

(main path)

 
 
 
 
Ethical Relativism

(Click here to continue on the main path)

Professor Sidgwick Speaking
We will deal with most of the questions in the next two sessions. But right now, let's try to formulate some additional definitions that we can use. 

To begin with, let's clarify the terms 'moral or ethical judgments' and 'moral or ethical principles.' I suggest that we use the following definitions:

  • A specific moral judgment applies to a specific action. For example, we may say "It was morally wrong for John to kill Harry."
  • A principle is broader than a judgment. It provides a rule that applies to many specific cases. For example, we may say "It is wrong to lie" or "It is wrong to kill innocent human beings." Sometimes we refer to principles as standards or rules. And sometimes one principle is more fundamental than others in the sense that it is at a higher level of generality.

We already have a negative definition for ethical relativism. What about some of the other terms that you have mentioned? I'm thinking of 'objective,' 'absolute,' 'superior,' and 'equally valid.'

We need some clarification for these terms. Our definitions may be tentative, but they can give us something to start with.

Who has thoughts on this? Just some tentative definitions that we can use in our next session?

 


Ariadne's Home Contact Ariadne at: Ethical Relativism Home
Ethics Bibliography Ethical Relativism Contents