Understanding what makes our actions morally right or wrong is one of the oldest questions in philosophy. Below are three approaches—Objectivism, Relativism, and Emotivism—presented in very simple terms (sourced from the University of Edinburgh’s ‘Introduction to Philosophy’ course), and examples to make each idea easier to grasp.
Moral Objectivism – Morality is objective
Moral objectivism is the idea that moral judgments exist independently of what people think or feel. A moral claim is either objectively true or false, regardless of personal views.
An example of moral objectivism: “Stealing is wrong, no matter what a person or society believes.” Even if some cultures accept stealing in certain cases, a moral objectivist would say it is still objectively wrong.
Moral Relativism – Morality depends on Culture or Belief
Moral relativism is the idea that moral judgements are true or false only in relation to a specific culture, society, or personal belief. What is considered right or wrong can vary between people or groups.
An example of moral relativism: In some cultures, eating meat is morally acceptable. In others, like certain Hindu or Buddhist communities, it is considered wrong. Unlike a moral objectivist, a moral relativist would say neither view is objectively right or wrong—each is right within its own cultural or belief systems
Emotivism – Morality as Expression of Feelings
Moral emotivism is the idea that moral judgements do not express objective truths and cannot be right or wrong and are only emotions or feelings. Moral claims, in this view are not true or false—they are expressions or attitudes.
An example of emotivism: When someone says, “Murder is wrong,” they’re only expressing their disapproval, not stating a fact. It’s like saying “Boo to murder!” It’s not a fact, just an emotion, there is no objective truth about lying being right or wrong.
Conclusion
Objectivism argues moral truths exist independantly of what anyone believes
Relativism argues morality is dependant on culture, society, or individual perspective
Emotivism argues moral statements express feelings, not facts
Leave a Reply