Moral Relativism

Moral Relativism Moral Relativism Attracts And Repels What Is Defensible In It And What Is To Be Rejected Do We As Human Beings Have No Shared Standards By Which We Can Understand One Another Can We Abstain From Judging One Another S Practices Do We Truly Have Divergent Views About What Constitutes Good And Evil, Virtue And Vice, Harm And Welfare, Dignity And Humiliation, Or Is There Some Underlying Commonality That Trumps It All These Questions Turn Up Everywhere, From Montaigne S Essay On Cannibals, To The UN Declaration Of Human Rights, To The Debate Over Female Genital Mutilation They Become Ever Urgent With The Growth Of Mass Immigration, The Rise Of Religious Extremism, The Challenges Of Islamist Terrorism, The Rise Of Identity Politics, And The Resentment At Colonialism And The Massive Disparities Of Wealth And Power Between North And South Are Human Rights And Humanitarian Interventions Just The Latest Form Of Cultural Imperialism By What Right Do We Judge Particular Practices As Barbaric Who Are The Real Barbarians In This Provocative New Book, The Distinguished Social Theorist Steven Lukes Takes An Incisive And Enlightening Look At These And Other Challenging Questions And Considers The Very Foundations Of What We Believe, Why We Believe It, And Whether There Is A Profound Discord Between Us And Them. Although he is very aware and succinctly delineates the issues of cognitive relativism that underpin cultural, moral, and social relativism, the refreshing part of Steven Lukes Moral Relativism is that he applies a sociological, as well as philosophical, perspective to the issues Without surrendering the truth in relativism, he also recognizes the need for some kind of objective standard in ethics Where can that objective standard be found Lukes answer seems to be in justification Is o Although he is very aware and succinctly delineates the issues of cognitive relativism that underpin cultural, moral, and social relativism, the refreshing part of Steven Lukes Moral Relativism is that he applies a sociological, as well as philosophical, perspective to the issues Without surrendering the truth in relativism, he also recognizes the need for some kind of objective standard in ethics Where can that objective standard be found Lukes answer seems to be in justification Is one able to justify one s moral decision beyond one s immediate social institution or network To avoid oversimplifying, please note that Lukes begins very carefully by establishing the perspective of cognitive relativism which has defined the post modern world since Nietszche s There is only a perspective seeing, only a perspective knowing p 2 His approach uses an und
I was disappointed by Steven Lukes Moral Relativism I had expected an interesting treatise on the philosophical aspects of moral relativism, but instead the book is groundedin sociology and anthropology, which, by personal taste, I find less engaging.Lukes makes some interesting points about moral relativism He asserts that there are two kinds of moral relativism First is the concept that there are many moral systems instead of a
The book centers around two conflicting intuitions 1 there are universal principles of right and wrong and 2 who are we to judge other cultures One chapter explores the notion of what a culture is and comes to the conclusion that it eludes an easy definition The final chapter of the book concludes that the second question is not a good question Activists within societies challenge cultural institutions of their own societies such as female genital mutilation and wife beating, and it is The book centers around two conflicting intuitions 1 there are universal principles of right and wrong and 2 who are we to judge other cultures One chapter explores the notion of what a culture is and comes to the conclusion that it eludes an easy definition The final chapter of the book concludes that the second question is not a good question Activists within societies challenge cultural institutions of their own societies such as female genital mutilation and wife beating, and it is those in power who benefit from the institutions who invoke the concept of protecting culture The author suggests two approaches for making moral judgments 1 the Kantian question of whether all participants affected by a custom would agree that it is positive and justified, and 2 the Aristotelian question of whether the custom drags any of the participants below a threshold of human capabilities The author concludes that wife beating, for example, does
I m declining to rate because I m not well versed in this topic to determine how well and how impartially the author had presented his argument But it was a clear and concise argument, with sufficient background to aid the reader s understanding. Moral Relativism is a topic that has been coming upandin my life as I find myself at odds with those around me on the true nature of morality Moral Relativism can mean so many different things though I only know that I believe morality to be a construct of the human mind, and therefore fluid and subjective.I was hoping to getenlightenment on the Philosophy of Moral Relativism with this book Unfortunately it wasof a Sociological book about the clashes of morality when c Moral Relativism is a topic that has been coming upandin my life as I find myself at odds with those around me on the true nature of morality Moral Relativism can mean so many different things though I only know that I believe morality to be a construct of the human mind, and therefore fluid and subjective.I was hoping to geten
This book is slim and sweet about Moral Relativism It goes through the history and development, starting with Montaigne, explaining why the idea gained currency recently, especially in Anthropology, and then pokes some holes At some point he says Moral Relativism is a non sequitur, after he has spent 159 pages defining it Relativism is an antidote to Absolutism, but not a perfect solutionA quote he uses which was memorable by Robert Frost explains the problem rather well a liberal is This book is slim and sweet about Moral Relativism It goes through the history and development, starting with Montaigne, explaining why the idea gained currency recently, especially in Anthropology, and then pokes some holes At some point he says Moral Relativism is a non sequitur, after he has spent 159 pages defining it Relativism is an antidote to Absolutism, but not a perf
Does anyone know what this guy is talking about Are any of these sentence structures legal You know, I m taking a philosophy class in school and I totally love it, which is why this book caught my eye I wanted to read about this topic and educate myself outside of class, but I just can t do it with this book I got through the preface and the first couple pages of the first chapter,
A fascinating and complex subject, thoroughly covered Alas, the author ruins most of the reading experience with his insistance on structuring the whole book on quotations from other writers No page without quotes, sometimes up to a dozen per page, resulting
Not as intriguing as I first thought.

➻ Moral Relativism  Download ➼ Author Steven Lukes – Rarefishingbooks.co.uk
  • Paperback
  • 208 pages
  • Moral Relativism
  • Steven Lukes
  • English
  • 08 February 2017
  • 0312427190