Cultural Relativism, Divine Command Theory, And Ethical Egoism

The basic Principles that has been covered in ethics of computer games is Cultural Relativism, Subjectivism in Ethics, Divine Command Theory, Natural Law Theory, and Ethical Egoism. These arguments do not meet the minimum conception of morality which is Reason and impartiality. For all these arguments to be solid they also need to have reason and logic supporting it. All these arguments which are now mostly unfollowed because of the evident flaws they pertain are as follows. Starting off with cultural relativism as professor Buscani states, Different cultures have different conceptions of right and wrong. Also, Rachels from the elements of moral philosophy uses that “different cultures have different moral codes” (17). It is understood by
cultural relativism and its basic tenets that morality differs from culture to culture which makes there be no object truth to morality. This Argument does not meet the minimum conception of mortality because it misses reason and is not logically sound. As stated from Rachels, this conclusion does not logically follow the premise which all must be true (19). The example given detailing the beliefs of the Greeks burning their bodies, and the callatians eating the bodies, both disagree with each other and now having an objective truth that neither party can see (19). Some of the problems that come with the argument that provide good reasons against it are the inability to criticize others and society even if wrong (20). Also from this principle comes the problem of not being able to criticize own society which helps us determine right and wrong (21). Lastly this principle does not let society grow and create social change (21). For all these reasons of the conclusion not following the premise are reasons against this argument. Next Principle being Subjectivism in ethics which from Rachels is the moral opinion based on our feeling and nothing more (34). From lectures with Buscani, this principle does not meet the minimum conception of morality by not accounting for disagreement and not being able to be wrong in moral evaluations. From Subjectivism in ethics also comes simple subjectivism and emotivism. The principle does not have impartiality and falls short of sound reason and logic. Some problems that occur from this principle which also diverts from being a reasonable argument is that is has no objective basis, meaning morality is an opinion (35). Continuing with simple subjectivism the idea when someone says something is morally good or bad, this is referring to them saying they approve or disapprove of it (35). This idea is also flawed by the simple means that when two people are at obvious disagreement at something, “if simple subjectivism were correct, then they would not be at disagreement” (Rachels,36). Next being emotivism which is the argument that “language is not a fact stating… used to convey information… Persuade” (Rachels, 37). This idea is also flawed because it simply denies plain logic and fact. An example of this would be the Nazi killing of millions because of feeling (40). This argument has no logic or reason along with it beside opinions. Another principle is the divine command theory.
This theory has the argument that the nature of right and wrong is known as the divine command theory, which is god’s law and must be followed as Buscani Stated. This principle also does not meet the minimum conception of morality because of its reason and lack of impartiality. the problems present are as follow. From Rachels book “morality is mysterious” (38,39). God is able to, as the book used, turn child abuse into right because of his command. This logic does not fit that argument. Also “god’s commands arbitrary” (Rachels, 53). As the text used just because god said as a command can conflict with many. “he could have easily commanded us to be liars” (Rachels, 53) instead of telling truth. Lastly the command divine theory gives people wrong reasons to follow moral principles. An example as the text used about child abuse, this would be don’t hit children because god said so instead of the actual psychological and physical harm done to child (54). These problems all present are logically a problem and fail to have solid reason and
impartiality. Continuing to the next principle of Natural law theory.
From Rachels text, natural law is described by having a particular view of world and its purposes (55). Also, presents how things are and also ought to be in world (56). Lastly concerns the moral knowledge of telling right and wrong (57). These main concepts are what make natural law theory different from command divine theory. This theory again does not meet the minimum conception of morality for its reason. Natural law lacks solid reason and logic behind it which makes it flawed. Some of the flaws are seen with its first key concept sometimes what’s natural is also bad. Examples would be human tendency for naturally caring for self, more than others or disease (57). Another flaw is presented is and ought to be statement of things should be. This is logically conflict for the simple reason that they are two different notions. Lastly this principle is conflicts with science and modern world views (58). Instead of the notion that things just happen where today science can prove many cases such as
gravity. Lastly, ethical egoism is the argument that each person ought to peruse his/her self-interest exclusively (65). This is different from psychological egoism which is each person does in fact pursue his/her self-interest. For many people as Buscani stated, this contradicts some of deepest moral beliefs. It is easy to dismiss Ethical egoism arguments because logically, it is not sound and very much misses the minimum conception of morality by not presenting solid reason and impartiality. This principle does not have a rational argument to stand by and also does not account all human activity where some might be done for self-interest but saving a life is instinctually. This also divides people and is arbitrary while also endorsing wicked action, provided you prosper (Buscani). These are the basic principles of morality and non-meet the minimum conception of morality. With a lack of reason and impartiality these have. Along with weak logic to back arguments up. With the reading of Hames Rachels and Professor Buscani these principles: Cultural Relativism, Subjectivism in Ethics, Divine Command Theory, Natural Law Theory, and Ethical Egoism are proved to fail the minimum conception for morality.