Examples Of Social Relativism
The dilemma presented in the textbook illustrates a case discussing homelessness, and the struggles to improve one’s lifestyle once one is homeless. The question is; does one hold the responsibility to get these homeless people out of the gutter – so to speak. This program has a direct correlation to my field of study, Commerce, as homelessness entails having a weak economy with a large unemployment rate.
In terms of ethical relativism, both personal and social relativism share the same notion when it comes to homelessness, and the responsibilities that are involved. As ethical relativism holds that there are no universally accepted ethical standards for individuals, there cannot be an objective standard that would be forced onto all of us. …show more content…
This, along with its theory based on the “greatest happiness principle”, where one must only contemplate how to further the highest magnitude of happiness to the absolute greatest amount of individuals. It’s important to note that all this happiness must be created while reducing the amount of suffering and unhappiness as well. Naturally, this doesn’t appear to support homelessness, as the consequences are going to be pushed onto the economy, and its highly unlikely it makes the most people happy. Thus, the only time where homelessness would be considered morally acceptable, would as long as this is what the individual actively wishes for in life, it fulfils maximum happiness and it does not cause anyone harm. However, this is still difficult to accept, as the consequences may outweigh the means. Firstly, the economy is greatly affected as being homeless requires help which is aided by the government and its tax payers. Secondly, not only does homelessness associate with starvation and poverty, but it tends make others – who are walking by – to feel uncomfortable; ultimately, breaking the greatest happiness principal. Thus, from a utilitarianism’s perspective, homelessness is not an acceptable lifestyle, and regulations should be put in place in order to prevent such
In terms of ethical relativism, both personal and social relativism share the same notion when it comes to homelessness, and the responsibilities that are involved. As ethical relativism holds that there are no universally accepted ethical standards for individuals, there cannot be an objective standard that would be forced onto all of us. …show more content…
This, along with its theory based on the “greatest happiness principle”, where one must only contemplate how to further the highest magnitude of happiness to the absolute greatest amount of individuals. It’s important to note that all this happiness must be created while reducing the amount of suffering and unhappiness as well. Naturally, this doesn’t appear to support homelessness, as the consequences are going to be pushed onto the economy, and its highly unlikely it makes the most people happy. Thus, the only time where homelessness would be considered morally acceptable, would as long as this is what the individual actively wishes for in life, it fulfils maximum happiness and it does not cause anyone harm. However, this is still difficult to accept, as the consequences may outweigh the means. Firstly, the economy is greatly affected as being homeless requires help which is aided by the government and its tax payers. Secondly, not only does homelessness associate with starvation and poverty, but it tends make others – who are walking by – to feel uncomfortable; ultimately, breaking the greatest happiness principal. Thus, from a utilitarianism’s perspective, homelessness is not an acceptable lifestyle, and regulations should be put in place in order to prevent such