the variable and relative of the moral is not our concept, ..
Related Post of Morality is relative essay;
Most moral realists who offer moral theories do not bother to offeranything like a definition of morality. Instead, what thesephilosophers offer is a theory of the nature and justification of aset of norms with which they take their audience already to beacquainted. In effect, they tacitly pick morality out by reference tocertain salient and relative uncontroversial bits of its content: thatit prohibits killing, stealing, deceiving, cheating, and so on. Infact, this would not be a bad way of defining morality, if the pointof such a definition were only to be relatively theory-neutral, and toallow theorizing to begin. We could call it “thereference-fixing definition” or “the substantivedefinition”.
Is Morality Relative or Universal Coursework - Essay …
One concept of rationality that supports the exclusion of sexualmatters, at least at the basic level, from the norms of morality, isthat for an action to count as irrational it must be an act that harmsoneself without producing a compensating benefit forsomeone—perhaps oneself, perhaps someone else. Such an accountof rationality might be called “hybrid”, since it givesdifferent roles to self-interest and to altruism. An account ofmorality based on the hybrid concept of rationality could agree withHobbes (1660) that morality is concerned with promoting people livingtogether in peace and harmony, which includes obeying the rulesprohibiting causing harm to others. Although moral prohibitionsagainst actions that cause harm or significantly increase the risk ofharm are not absolute, in order to avoid acting immorally,justification is always needed when violating these prohibitions. Kant(1797) seems to hold that it is never justified to violate some ofthese prohibitions, e.g., the prohibition against lying. This islargely a result of the fact that Kant’s (1785) concept ofrationality is purely formal, in contrast with the hybrid concept ofrationality described above.