Is Morality Objective Or Relative?

4 Pages 991 Words

Morality is objective, and is self-evident. I will prove that moral relativism is self-refuting and unethical with concrete examples that we see in nature, and have seen in history. Ethical (moral) relativity is defined as the denial of any absolute or objective moral values, and the affirmation of the individual (person, community, culture, etc) as the source of reality. This philosophy is a dangerous cancer that is consuming our society and polluting the thinking of main-stream America. The world is already losing its moral backbone in saying that homosexuality and abortion are ok; it is only a matter of time when euthanasia and other forms of assisted suicide are acceptable. Once we begin to lose respect for the sanctity of life and accept crimes that we accept as fundamentally wrong are taken as subjective and open to interpretation, we will be heading on a downward spiral to anarchy. If broken down completely, we se that morality, if carried out to the extremes, would have to accept that our justice system is incorrect, that Adolph Hitler was justified for the holocaust, and that ultimately there is no right or wrong.
We live in a world where we know that absolutes do in fact exist. We know that 1+1=2, what goes up must come down (gravity), and there is absolute difference between the physical make up of men and women. These are physical facts that no one will deny. To apply the same basic objective truths to morality comes just as easily. Morality is defined as the quality of being in accord with standards of right or good conduct. A moral relativist would say that these standards are different for every individual. This would mean that if I wanted to I could engage in an argument with a relativist and once the relativist proves that their viewpoint is right I could go and justifiably steal their car. This is not wrong, because at that point in time stealing the car fitted my purpose and accomplished what I desired...