Sunday, January 25, 2009

Blog Assignment #4


Last names beginning with A - G: Moral Relativism

1. Paragraph: Explain in your own words what Moral Relativism is—what do people who hold this view believe? Moral relativism is the view that there is no objective and impartial moral truth. In other words, there is no correct morality that applies to all people in all cultures. A moral relativist holds that a moral value is relative to the society it comes from and does not necessarily apply to another society. Therefore, extreme moral relativists can argue that there is no room to criticize anybody's value system because there is no universal morality, only a set of values that are acceptable to the individual.
2. Paragraph & Link: Find one online resources related to this topic—not Wikipedia. Explain in a brief paragraph what you learned about this topic through the resource you found; include the link at the end of your paragraph.
The argument for moral relativism dates back as far as classical Greek times. The twentieth century witnessed a large growth in studies conducted by anthropologists in order to try and resolve some of the large differences between Western and non-Western cultures. This produced branches in the school of thought known as moral relativism. In particular, these branches are called descriptive moral relativism (DMR) and metaethical moral relativism (MMR). Descriptive moral relativism deals in matter-of-fact arguments as it points out the fact that there are very large differences between cultures when it comes to morality. Metaethical moral relativism goes a step further by actually asserting that there is no absolute justification for any moral judgment but the justification is relative to the society in which it exists. source: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moral-relativism/
3. Argument: Compose a short argument, in “argument elements” form. I’ll provide the arguable issue; you provide the rest. Make sure each of your premises is a complete sentence, and that your argument doesn’t break any of the rules listed in the first chapter of the Rulebook for Arguments:


Arguable Issue: The arguable issue is whether or not Moral Relativism is a good view to hold.
Conclusion:Moral Relativism is not a good view to hold.
Premises: Moral Relativism is not a good view to hold because:
(1)It denies a universal and objective set of moral values.
(2)It empowers moral diversity.
(3)It provides a justification for people to behave any way they see fit.

The Role of the Majority View

1. Paragraph: Explain in your own words what a Majority View is. Cite your sources.
A majority view is when 51 percent or more of a group of people agree on a certain issue. A closer examination of any majority view will reveal a cross-section of differing individual views on the issue at hand. Some individuals will be very well informed on the issue, some will be completely uninformed on the issue and unaware of their ignorance, while most will be somewhere in between knowledge and ignorance. In this way it can be argued that a majority view isn't necessarily correct. Two examples given by the Ruggiero text are women's right to vote and slavery. At the time when women could not vote and slavery was used in America, it was the majority view that this was the way it should be. These are clear cut examples that just because the majority says it is okay does not necessarily make it correct.
2. Argument: Compose a short argument, in “argument elements” form. I’ll provide the arguable issue; you provide the rest. Make sure each of your premises is a complete sentence, and that your argument doesn’t break any of the rules listed in the first chapter of the Rulebook for Arguments:

Arguable Issue: The arguable issue is whether or not the Majority View is a reliable basis for ethical decision-making.
Conclusion:
The Majority View is not a reliable basis for ethical decision-making.
Premises:
The Majority View is not a reliable basis for ethical decision-making because:
(1)
It draws its basis of justification from the decisions of others instead of examining the issues.
(2)
The majority view has been wrong before. (e.g. slavery)
(3)
It promotes groupthink, which is defined by dictionary.com as the practice of approaching problems or issues as matters that are best dealt with by consensus of a group rather than by individuals acting independently;conformity.

The Role of Feelings

1. Paragraph: Explain in your own words what feelings are. Cite your sources.
Feelings are our inclination to respond a certain way towards things or ideas in our minds or environment. Our feelings can be very highly influenced by a slew of psychological factors including past experiences, our disposition, and our mental health. The Ruggiero text emphasizes Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Carl Rogers as early pioneers of using feelings to guide decision making. These men basically assert that what feels right must be right and what feels wrong must be wrong. The Ruggiero text notes that morality by feelings completely ignores other people's feelings which is a large flaw.
2. Argument: Compose a short argument, in “argument elements” form. I’ll provide the arguable issue; you provide the rest. Make sure each of your premises is a complete sentence, and that your argument doesn’t break any of the rules listed in the first chapter of the Rulebook for Arguments:

Arguable Issue: The arguable issue is whether or not our feelings are a reliable basis for ethical decision-making.
Conclusion:
Our feelings are not a reliable basis for ethical decision-making.
Premises:
Our feelings are not a reliable basis for ethical decision-making because:
(1)
"Morality by feelings completely ignores other people's feelings."
(2)
Each person has the potential to commit good or bad acts based on emotion.
(3)
There will be inevitable conflicts between the feelings of one person and those of another.

The ability to express yourself in your own words is essential in this class. Did you put everything in your own words this time?
I used my own words for many of my answers, however, I also used ideas found in chapters two and three of the Ruggiero text and the Stanford University web page on moral relativism. Also, I used dictionary.com for the definition of groupthink. I gave credit to the Ruggiero text where it was due.

What was easiest / hardest about this assignment?
The easy part was explaining the meanings of moral relativism, the majority view, and feelings in my own words. The hardest part was definitely constructing the short arguments. I say this because there are many rules that must be followed to construct a logically sound argument. Sometimes it was hard to come up with three clearly related premises to support my conclusions. I feel I am getting better at it though.

How will you apply what you learned through this assignment to your everyday life?
In the future I will definitely be more aware of moral relativism in practice when I see it. Also, it will be easier for me to discern when a majority of people is making an incorrect decision and this will allow me to make the right decision regardless of other people's opinions.

How well do you think you did on this assignment? Explain.
I feel as though I did good on this assignment because I read the assigned texts and fully explained out the meanings of the terms. Also, I did my best to construct logically sound arguments and I feel I am getting better at doing that.



No comments:

Post a Comment