Essay Example on Relativism in Religion and Ethics: A Closer Look

It is all relative, is the position that is taken by various scholars, concerning ethics. In most cases, people take a stand about an issue, depending on the effect they have. That is subject to change when the circumstances change, or an individual is subjected to a different set of conditions. Even the positions that are taken by religion, and ethics in most cases, are relative to different people. For example, according to Thomas Nagel, in Christianity, it is said that one should love their neighbor (Sommers and Sommers 194). That means that the actions that are directed to the next individual should be favorable for their welfare. That is a position that any individual would take, so as to be defined as being moral and religious. However, when the neighbor induces you to be part of something that is unfavorable, the love will not persist. That is because love is subjective to various circumstances, and the effects that human interactions and activities have. During normal circumstances, the desire for a neighbor would hold, but when subjected to a different set of conditions, the love is relative and may cease to exist.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

In most cases, morality is objective, which is based on the information that an individual is exposed to. Furthermore, the circumstances that the various parties are in influence their view of an issue. For example, it is common knowledge that murder is a sin. That is because life is sacred, hence should be respected. Anyone that kills another person contravenes the principles of morality/. However, that is subject to change, for example, when a robber is shot, because of their activities. That is a violation of ethics but is right in such circumstances. On a typical day and conditions, the killing of an individual would have been unethical, hence illegal. However, in this case, opinion towards the murder changes because of the change in circumstances. The same applies to when a convict is sentenced to death. That is right according to the law, but initially concerning ethics, it is wrong. Therefore, that further highlight the fact that all is opinions and stands are relative.

Rightness and obligation is the other base that is considered in taking the position of all being relative. That is based on the various theories that have been developed over time defining what is right or is wrong. They are all objective, as they do not point to the same course of action, and are bound to change with time. First is ethical egoism, which is for the idea that an individual is supposed to do an activity that advances their own interests (Sommers and Sommers 78). That is relative, because what advances one’s attention might be unethical to another person. For example, when one steals to gain material possession, that is immoral, hence wrong, according to the owner of the property being stolen. Therefore, the theory is relative rather than being objective, where it would have been much better. Furthermore, there is utilitarianism, calling for people to do what will promote good for more people. That, too, is subjective, as an unethical action, also, can fulfill the interests of many people. The same aspect of relative bases of thought is used for Kant’s theory, whereby it is our duty to follow universal rules. Some rules are meant for the good of a few people, and some are inconsistent with our interests. Therefore, the theory contravenes the through proposed by the others, which further highlights the relative nature of most principles.

Ethical relativism is another basis for the idea that all the stands and preferences we have are relative. That is in the form of the example of female genital mutilation that was being practiced in some cultures. The practice was approved in that culture, because of the multiple benefits that it had for the girls. It was the culture in those communities because of the perceived benefits of the practice. However, in some cultures, outside the ones that encouraged the practice, it was unethical (Sommers and Sommers 94). That was based on various issues, which were inconsistent with the interests of those people. However, in the culture that propagated the practice, it was right, because they had their justification. Based on the explanation, the practice was carried on for such a long time, and the communities approved it. However, in other cultures, the practice was unethical. That was because of the adverse effects that it had on the welfare of the girls. The parties that were for the practice, and those against it, had their unique justifications. That highlights the relative nature of the practices that people undertake. They may be approved and disapproved at the same time, based on different schools of thought.

However, there is an objection to the issue that all is relative; it is based on what is universally right or wrong. What is universally correct is an activity that is within the interests of all people regardless of their beliefs. John Arthur explains that morality does not depend on religion or the unique differences that exist among people in society. Morality is based on principles, which are upheld by all people regardless of their differences. For example, honesty is a virtue that is supported by all people, irrespective of their religious or cultural affiliation. It is because honesty advances the best interests of people in a society. With honesty, people are capable of loving well with one another. That is whereby; the people are capable of trusting one another. When people trust each other, then society is a better place. Honesty is just an example of a virtue that should be upheld by all people, regardless of their differences. On that basis, it can be said that all is not relative. It is objective, because the right actions are right for all people, because of the better welfare that they facilitate among people.

Conclusion

However, that is seen as a generalization when it comes to other issues such as cultural practices. For example, different people express their faith in ways that are justified by their history or culture. Therefore, objectivity is challenging to apply in that case. That is because the possibility of there being one right course of action is low. That is a critique of the idea of objectivity, where there is the idea that all is not objective. People have different priorities and preferences, which highlights the relative nature of judgment. What might be right for some people is unacceptable for others. Therefore, based on the examples above, it is factual to state that all is relative, because of the lack of uniformity of judgment among different people..

Work Cited

Singer, P., C. Sommers, and F. Sommers. "Vice and virtue in everyday life: Introductory readings in ethics." (1989): 758. https://archive.org/details/vicevirtueineve000somm/page/n3/mode/2up/search/Moral+Doctrines+and+Moral+Theories+