After reading “Some moral minima,” I must say I have to agree with Lenn Goodman’s opinions. He argues that there are certain things that are simply wrong. Though they greatly reflect his relativism, I agree on the topics he chose are all wrong in the eyes of another culture’s morals and virtues. We as human beings, and the societies we constitute can be wrong. “Consent is a helpful marker, but neither necessary nor sufficient to legitimacy. Some whose interests are critically affected by our acts have no effectual say in our choices. Principles are principles; no norms delineating concretely, and uncompromisingly, wrong from right” (Goodman, 2010). I agree there should be universal moral requirements in regards to these practices. In this paper, I will take the four topics chosen by Goodman, Genocide, Famine and Germ Warfare, Terrorism, Hostages, and Child Warriors, Slavery, Polygamy, and Incest, and Rape and Clitoridectomy and present my argument for each one. The first topic chosen is Genocide, Famine and Germ Warfare. Genocide, Famine and Germ Warfare is mass murder. People should definitely understand what makes this wrong. If people believed they had the right to wipe out an entire race, it is like saying aliens are real and it would be understood why they would want to wipe out the human race. The purpose lies in the intent, not just the scale of the crime. What we as people of many cultures need to realize is that we are not so different in ways we think, we must understand that we are all one big race no matter the features. “More dreams are broken and more futures cut short when more lives are taken. But genocide targets individuals as members of a group, seeking to destroy a race, a culture, a linguistic or ethnic identity, even a class as the Soviets did in the Ukraine, or Mao in China, or the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia. The target is a way of life” (Goodman, 2010). The second topic is Terrorism, Hostages,...
...RIGHT OR WRONG? 1
Marijuana Legalization: Right or Wrong?
November 18, 2013
RIGHT OR WRONG 2
Marijuana Legalization: Right or Wrong
Marijuana has been around since the beginning of time and there has been a lot of
controversy over whether it should be legalized in some states in the United States. Marijuana is
used widely across the world by many different people, cultures, social classes, and ages. In this
paper I will discuss some of the benefits of using Marijuana and also some of the harmful things
that can become of using this drug and why people are against or for the legalization of
Marijuana. Marijuana activists claim that the drug has no bad lasting side effects, but I disagree
with that, due to it being a gateway drug for young adults in high school experimenting with
drugs and alcohol. Marijuana should not be legalized because it leads to many negative
consequences in one’s life.
Marijuana is very popular and it is easy to get from any street corner in any city, as long
as you know the right people. Marijuana is rated in the U.S. to be the most accessible street drug.
According to (Khamsi, 2013) “a national survey was taken and 48 percent of Americans say they
have tried smoking it, and 6.5 percent of all high school...
...Gay Marriage Right or Wrong
There are so many ethical issues that are continuously debated and still there has been no resolution. Gay Marriage is an ethical issue that has been debated for years. This is an issue that I think that will continue to be debated as a clear answer as to why it is morally wrong has yet to be determined. For so long a deontological view has been applied to the subject. Those who are opposed to same sex marriage take on this view. I do not think that a deontological view will solve the issue of whether same sex marriage is right or wrong. However I do fee l that taking on a perspective brought to the issue by relativism will assist in giving an understanding of why it is important that we respect the needs and wants of those who are in same sex relationships and allow Gay Marriage. This won’t solve the issue either but will just provide insight into their world.
Religion has played a big part in how this issue of same sex marriage has been handled. Deontologists argue that the bible states the marriage is between a Man and woman. So no matter the consequences same sex marriage is not right. The legalization of same sex marriage has been addressed dating back to 1971 with Baker vs. Nelson. Here,” the court determined that homosexuals did not have the right to marry because marriage was defined as being between a man...
Why Study Ethics? If we have laws and religion, why do we need ethics? Ethics is the study of right and wrong. Everyone makes decisions each day that are essentially choices. For some, choices are considered strictly personal and no one else’s business: Should I have a strip of bacon with my eggs? But for some, even that simple choice has ethical ramifications: Should I eat meat? Is it anyone else’s concern that I eat meat? Other choices confront us as the day progresses: Should I call in sick? Should I obey the speed laws as I drive to work? Should I answer a friend’s question honestly or lie and potentially hurt her feelings? Should I be faithful to my spouse? How does one find answers to these questions? For some, laws and religion provide the answers. But for most, those two sources are insufficient. Ethical Relativism In the past for most people and even for many people today, an objective moral standard that is binding on all people for all times exists. While there might be disagreement on what the standard was, most acknowledged that there was a “right” choice. But in the last half-century, there has been considerable erosion in the idea that a standard exists or is even needed. For many, decisions about what is right and wrong are complete personal and completely subjective: what is right for me may not be right for you....
...There will always be an argument about what is right and what is wrong. People have different morals, standards, and beliefs on what they believe are right and wrong. According to Goodman, “The fact is, we humans and the societies we constitute can be wrong, unjust, and vicious—hugely or trivially, tragically or self-deceivingly.” (Goodman, 2010, p. 88, para. 2). Moral choices are conducted on a daily basis, by every culture, which can be viewed on an ethical scale of right or wrong, by other cultures. In her writing of “Some Moral Minima”, Lenn E. Goodman views several aspects of morality and relativism, and argues that certain things are just wrong. In presenting my own morals, I agree with this statement; however, pondering the image, that only one accurate ethic exists and that we may be able to find universal moral requirements and arrive at a multiethnic agreement on issues presented by Goodman is a parable. In this paper, I will state my opinion on challenges Goodman presents to relativism. I will also provide my thoughts on if there are such universal moral requirements.
Ethical relativism insists that there is no right or wrong, but that it may be understood relative to a culture, a society, or even an individual. Relativism may be used when claims come about that is hard to defend, but at the same time can cause other...
...The PATRIOT Act: Right or Wrong.
On September 11th of 2001 the United States was attacked. Many people died and through that drama the United States was unified with a singular goal of stopping terrorism. While many people were willing to sacrifice a few freedoms for the greater good, others were asking where is the line between the government fighting terrorism and abusing a situation to expand its dominion over the public. The United States government passed a bill called the PATRIOT Act to simplify procedures, relax rule sets on prosecution and give the government more jurisdiction into the personal lives of the populace by allowing surveillance techniques like roving wire taps and data mining without provocation or court order. While many officials state that this act is a crucial tool in the war on terror, others argue that it is unconstitutional and taking away the freedoms the government is supposed to protect. This difference in opinion has raised the question of how much privacy should the population be willing to give up to support the war on terror. The PATRIOT Act is walking a dangerous line and it would be irresponsible to accept it without research into the pros and cons, which are not equal. Although the act does have a few benefits, it goes too far over that line by giving the far too much power to the government while taking away too many freedoms.
There is no question that terrorism is bad and it is a good thing for...
...IS ABORTION WRONG OR IS IT RIGHT?
Abortion is defined as: "the termination of pregnancy and expulsion of an embryo or of a fetus that is incapable of survival." However, if only the debate over the abortion issue was as simple as the definition provided above. Much like every aspect of human life, a statement is neither right nor wrong, but simply left open for interpretation. There is no black and white in life, only gray areas. Some issues tend to provide us more gray areas than others. Abortion is a prime example of that. Those who refute abortion claim that it is the murder of a helpless baby who has not yet had the chance to live and function as a human being. However, the debate opposite it is just as fervent: it is a woman's right to choose what happens to her body, and if she decides that she is not capable of bringing a child into this world, than she shouldn't be forced to out of nature. Where do we draw the line between humane and inhumane, necessitated death and murder? When does a woman's right over her internal reproductive organs become that of the government's? Is abortion wrong or is it right? Are rape, incest, and potential fatality to the mother exceptions when abortion is "okay"? Are there truly any at all? So many questions are raised by such a fervent debate, that we must look at both sides of the issue to better understand it in a...
...Maturity is knowing when to do the right thing and following up on one's commitment even when he or she is tempted to do wrong. Huck Finn, in The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain, is faced with such temptations and situations where he is able to make the right choice and mature physically, mentally, and spiritually. He is able to avoid bad decisions, which leads him to become a more mature, established young man. Although Huck Finn finds himself acting immature at times, he still fully demonstrates maturity by the end of the novel.
Throughout the novel, Huck is able to recognize what is wrong and decipher what should be right. Huck realizes that the King and Duke are taking advantage of the girl's inheritance money. He realizes that what they are doing is incorrect and something should be done. This is first demonstrated when Huck states, "It was enough to make a body ashamed of the human race" (175). This shows that Huck is developing a conscience and that he is able to recognize that what the Duke and King are doing is morally wrong. He determines that taking and robbing from innocent people is not what humans are supposed to do. This is also evident when Huck states, "I say to myself this is a girl that I'm letting that old reptile rob her of her money!" (188). This thought established by Huck shows that he can distinguish between what is right and what is...
Another great point brought up was that what was done is done and that no matter what the punishment given to the perpetrator may be, it will not bring the victim back to life. Making the death penalty one of the biggest contradictions in today’s society. Basically what the death penalty is is killing someone, who killed someone, to prove that killing is wrong. The fact is that most murders are committed in the spur or heat of the moment, when the person is not quite thinking rationally.
Revenge seems to be one of the biggest factors influencing the choice of the death penalty. In today’s society we have come to the conclusion that when someone does something to you, you should do the same or even something worse in return. We have based it of the ideology that is “an eye for an eye”; making the death penalty more about getting even rather than serving justice. Many have stated that not only does the death penalty serve justice but it also brings comfort and closure to the families of the victims. The main concern that this group of extremists is having is that the death penalty is done for all the wrong reasons. Many people have established their belief that they should get to choose when the life of the person is taken, being that they themselves chose when to take the life of the victim. Mrs. King herself opposes the death penalty; claiming that it does nothing but contribute to the killing cycle. It is a violent and hateful act...