PHI2604 Chapter Notes -Moral Relativism, List Of Civilisations In The Culture Series

14 views1 pages

Camilaabreu16

21 Mar 2022

School

Miami Dade College

Department

Philosophy

Course

PHI2604

Professor

For unlimited access to Textbook Notes, a Class+ subscription is required.

Document Summary

This source argues for a type of ethical relativism, which holds that what is considered ethically valuable varies from culture to culture. A normal action is one that falls well within the bounds of acceptable behavior in a given society. Different cultures have different matrices that determine what people in the culture consider to be right or wrong. It recognizes the diversity of human beings within cultures where people must find their place, which is considered abnormal. In any culture, normalcy defines the socially elaborated segment of human behavior. Homosexuality was once considered highly abnormal, but this has changed in modern society. There are cultures that promote different orientations based on certain behaviors a person has, and what is now considered mental illness can be considered rationality to others, while genial behavior would be considered deviancy.

Related Questions

Brief and detail

If relativism is true, can you ever judge something as being morally wrong? Consider some really horrible actions, genocide, murder, slavery, torture or add your own. If you feel a relativist could say that these things are actually wrong, what gives them this ability? If they can't, why not?

Agree or disagree

Similarly to what I said in the first discussion on what morality means to us, I think everyone has their own set of moral principles and obligations. So I do think that relativism is true, to a point however. I used Adolf Hitler and the Nazi empire as an example in the first discussion so I will use that here. Hitler knew in his brain that what he was doing was good for his nation and arguably the world. Now, as a modern day society we can agree that was wrong. For him, it was good. In his own mind, he is right. But it is relative to the person. Generally speaking we all have similar notions of what is right and what is wrong. Most people would say that going out of your way to help someone else is a morally good principle. Selflessness in society is seen a good thing by the vast majority of people. When I say that relativism is good to a point, I mean that there is a general basis in society that deems actions as good or bad. And since most of us would all agree that hitlers actions were bad, then we say that he had bad moral principles, even though to him, they were good. It’s a little confusing even for me to put into words. Basically, if you actions are generally viewed in society as good, then you have good moral principles even if they vary from person to person. No one will have the exact same moral standards, but generally they all are very similar in society. So relativism is true until the point where the majority of society would deem your actions and wrong. I hope this makes sense.

Agree or disagree

If relativism is true, I don't think judging something as morally wrong is possible. Because the definition of ethical relativism is the moral standard only being correctly relative to each person/society, this means that the moral standard is created by you and/or the society you identify with and therefore eliminate the existence of an absolute moral principle. Since the moral standard is different for every individual, we cannot say that someone is morally wrong. If relativism is applied, that is. If a relativist were to say that they could judge someone as morally wrong, then that would contradict the main component of being a relativist. That every moral argument of yours is correct, therefore everyone else's is also correct. Quite problematic but that is my understanding on the matter

ell25

consider two surfaces at different temperatures, one cold at Tc and one hot at Th. Two rods of different materials and different cross-sectional areas, but the same length, are placed in contact with the walls, and they conduct heat from one to the other. One rod is copper with kCu= 397J/s m degree C, and the second is iron with kFe= 79.5J/s m degree C. If both rods transfer energy at the rate P, determine the area AFe of the iron rod if the copper one has ACu= 0.3m^2. (note both rods have same length.)

Consider a slab of copper which has a thickness of 25 cm and anarea of
90 cm2 which separates two environments with differenttemperatures.
Initially environment A has a temperature of 125oC and environmentB
has a temperature of 10oC.
(Thermal conductivity of Copper = 400 W/m K)
a. Determine the initial rate of energy transfer through theslab?
b. Sketch the temperature of environment A as a function oftime.
Only changes due to heat transfer through the slab should be
considered.
c. On the same sketch draw the temperature of environment B asa
function of time.
d. Explain the form of the sketches.

PHI2604 Chapter Notes -Moral Relativism, List Of Civilisations In The Culture Series

Document Summary

Get access

Related textbook solutions

Physics: Principles with Applications

Related Documents

ATS1262 Lecture Notes - Lecture 1: Ruth Benedict, Catalepsy

PHLB07H3 Lecture Notes - Lecture 4: Moral Relativism, Cultural Relativism, Logical Form

PSY240H5 Lecture Notes - Lecture 2: Comorbidity, Thomas Szasz, Prefrontal Cortex

Related Questions