Morals and Principles
The term “morals” or in other words Principles often depicts a range of widely acceptable standards of behavior or etiquette governing right or wrong in a society. The fact that there is right and wrong is the fundamental principle that dictates law and order in any society, therefore the individual response to the queries; Which deeds are right and which are wrong?, What brands a certain behavior right or wrong? And how do I know what is right and wrong? Is the key deciding factor to whether this particular individual performs a right or a wrong act. However different cultures possess different legal codes, meaning that the right or wrong notion is inherent in the specific societal settings. Due to moral diversity, there arises a complexity in deciding on a universal code of conduct, entailing that the moral truth profound in a certain society is constituent of their social organization.
In order for there to be any form of agreement, there must be at least some kind of correspondence between the involved parties. This is usually the fundamental beginning of diversity of ideas and eventual divergence in the perception of moral truths. Across all societies, there exists three unique statements that dictate moral awareness; the first is factual statements, these are true or false claims which are either affirmed or refuted depending on the general exposure or beliefs which are as diverse as they can get. Secondly there are conceptual statements which discuss the meaning of certain disputed terms or situations for instance whether a fetus may be classified as a person. Thirdly there are moral statements that tell if something is right or wrong. Again this is very dependent on the societal beliefs like whether it is ok to procure an abortion.
Moral relativism is the philosophical doctrine that all criteria of judgment are relative to the individuals and situations involved and is said to take different kinds of positions which include the; meta-ethical or normative positions. Hence each of them is usually concerned with the differences in moral judgments across different kinds of people and cultures. Normative ethics thus addresses direct questions concerning our moral lives, these are questions about what morality requires or permits individuals to do, in order to enhance what is morally valuable. E.g. is it (morally) good to engage oneself to a life of pleasure.
The other position is Meta-ethics which on the other hand is concerned with questions about first-order (normative) ethical judgments, e.g. what’s the nature of morality; show the meaning of moral talk; is morality absolute or relative ;can moral judgments be true or false (objective) or merely subjective, thus how we can have knowledge of moral truth.
Cultural Relativism is also a major moral relativism problem which begins with the fact of moral diversity, thus different cultures have different types of moral codes. As a matter of fact it’s not just across different national cultures that moral opinions differ; most likely the same can happen between different subcultures of the same national culture. Moreover this shows that for moral diversity there are different cultures that have different moral codes or values. However consider a fairly different but related claim that for moral conflict different cultures have conflicting moral values, hence this does not show that moral diversity imply moral disagreement, generally because there is no universal moral truth.
In conclusion, there seems to be overwhelming arguments supporting the absence of a universal morality conformation. From the factual, conceptual and the moral correspondence to the philosophical approaches of moral relativism and meta-ethics positions, they all show that the moral truth profound in a certain society is constituent of their social organization. This is to say that “The moral truth pertaining to a people is a function of the way those people have chosen to organize their lives”.