Moral Relativism By Osama Bin Laden

This world is the abundant soil in which we plant our roots, but the quality and quantity of our growth often falls upon the virtues instilled by our environment. We exist in a society that blossoms with morals based on politics, geography, religion, and countless other variables. In such a society, it is virtually impossible for an entire world to agree on a set of morals to abide by, and therefore our world is saturated with the ideals of moral relativism, whether or not we see it blatantly. Moral relativism is often given the stigma of sprouting impurity or immorality, given the fact that it does not accept that there is a universal moral codex. As the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy states, the “most serious objection to moral relativism
is that it implies the pernicious consequence that “anything goes”: slavery is just according to the norms of a slave society; sexist practices are right according to the values of a sexist culture” (IEP, 2015). Although, at first glance, this may seem to ring true to moral relativism, it is a misinterpretation of the matter. Not only does this philosophy state that there are no morals of which our society can resoundingly agree on, but it is also the recognition that one set of commandments is superior to another: the diversity of worldwide cultures sews the seeds of hypotheses on existentialism, religion, creation, destruction, etc. Relativism also cannot claim to the explanation of why certain cultures and societies accept and/or decline virtues of another culture and society, but rather cultivates the notion that if there were a universal moral code, then such diversities within and between cultures would not exist so absolutely (IEP.com, 2015). No matter the stance, relativism is a controversial topic in the philosophical world, but many do not realize when they practice forms of moral relativism. For instance, the christian religion abides by the ten commandments, one being, “thou shalt not kill.” However, many christians will justify the killing of those who are considered evil for the common good and safety.
Osama Bin Laden is a figure that almost all in western society agreed had to be stopped in his tracks, which is not a particularly immoral idea to have. Although the idea of purposely ending a human life goes specifically against their initial creed, the common good of the country was in their best interests. Although moral relativism also clashes with the ideas of Christianity or many other religions, it is sometimes not recognized how prominent it is in many reasonings. “Morals and ethics can be altered from one situation, person, or circumstance to the next. Essentially, moral relativism says that anything goes, because life is ultimately without meaning. Words like "ought" and "should" are rendered meaningless. In this way, moral relativism makes the claim that it is morally neutral.” (“Moral Relativism”, 2015). This exemplifies Moral Relativism’s distance between Religion and unity with ideas such as atheism or existentialism, but it is not synonymous with
immorality. As the same article states, "…teaching morality doesn't mean imposing my moral values on others. It means sharing wisdom, giving reasons for believing as I do - and then trusting others to think and judge for themselves." (“Moral Relativism, 2015). The idea that there is no universal morality is not a call for sin or injustice, but rather an opportunity to experience another culture’s viewpoints: offering literary and artistic works to assist in the explaination the ideas of moral relativism.
In addition, ideas of moral relativism have become prominent in both classic and modern literary works.
Fyodor Dostoevsky’s “Crime and Punishment” often alludes to the still-blossoming ideas of moral relativism, especially concerning a conversation that acts as a precursor to Raskolnikov's crime. Within this dispute between two men in a bar, they discuss a woman, Alyona Ivanovna, and her sister Lizaveta: one states that the world would be better off without Alyona, who continuously beats her sister and “wearing out the lives of others”, and the other states that there is a natural order to the world. The man against Alyona declares, “A hundred thousand good deeds could be done and helped, on that old woman’s money….kill her, take her money… would not one tiny crime be wiped out by thousands of good deeds?” (Dostoevsky, 67). In this, we see two sides to one’s moral compass: one harvests the idea that the killing of Alyona is completely justified due to the fact that she is greedy and spiteful towards others, especially her kind, gentle sister. The other sows the seed of doubt for this idea, agreeing that this action could help, but natural order must be kept at all costs. These ideas are very close to existentialism and moral relativism (who often go hand-in-hand) in the sense that these men’s morals and virtue differ, presumably due to nature and
nurture.
The idea that moral relativism simply does not exist can often stem from religious backgrounds and cultural upbringing, but this idea alone is somewhat oxymoronic. Moral relativism is not synonymous with immorality, but rather recognizes the idea that, for example, a western civilization’s moral compass may be set on the opposite path of that of an eastern civilization. Either way, the soil in which we grasp at birth must be enriched with ideas of many cultures and wisdom of the world. Without the fruits of knowledge of the world around us, we are expected to bloom, but easily be withered.