Pros and Cons: The Analysis of the Dichotomous

Arguments on the Variables Affecting Ethics and Morality

There is no universal definition of morality that can be applied to the many discussions on
morality. One reason as to why this is the case, is because the term “morality” is used in two
broad senses; the descriptive, and the normative. However, this paper in particular will focus on
synthesizing the ideas about the variables that affect the definition of morality of an individual or
a society. Specifically, this paper will focus on using the pros and cons that have been formulated
about certain ideas into formulating said synthesis.

First topic to be tackled in this paper will be about cultural relativism. Cultural Relativism is
basically defined as to what certain societies deem as moral, usually with culture as it’s basis. In
this context, Culture is then defined as the standards and norms that are passed on by ancestors to
future generations, and basically is the first thing that is is embedded within an individual. So
naturally, Culture will be a powerful agent in determining our sense of morality, and it affects
societies. This premise of Cultural Relativism is good because; One, it generates and promotes
tolerance within society; Two, it provides clear guidelines that is followed by communities; and
Lastly, it is a legitimate view in Social Science. So does this mean that Cultural Relativism is
universally moral? Well not all the time. Because of it’s main premise, Cultural Relativism
creates conflict with societies with different culture, and what they deem as moral. An example
of this is the prevalence of racial discrimination in the USA during the earlier part of the 20th
century. The concept of racial discrimination is something that is regarded with negativity, yet it
was deemed as acceptable in american society back then.

Next topic will be on the idea of Subjectivism (feelings as basis for ethics) vs Objectivism
(facts as basis for ethics). These ideas were heavily influenced by the late English Philosopher
David Hume. Hume’s idea of ethics were split into two phases. The first phase leaned more into
subjectivism because he noted that the basis for ethics is feelings of an individual, and not reason.
The second phase leaned to objectivism, with reason as basis for ethics. Basically, Hume’s
started thinking that feelings should be the basis of ethics, because it allowed the individual to be
inclined with the decisions he/she makes. Over time, however, Hume leaned to reason as basis
for ethics, because he realized that although inclinination won’t be guaranteed, ethics based on
reason is much more reliable for impartial benefit to all. With Hume’s formulation of opposite
ideas, he laid out the foundation to later iterations of subjectivism and objectivism.

Lastly, we tackle morality as derived from god (religion). This notion talks about obedience
to the will of an omnipotent being, because as man, we are limited to our imperfection and
mortality. In this notion, the omnipotent being is a representation of a perfect being, rather than a
creator. This means that obedience must be observed not because it is demanded, but rather it is
what is moral. Contradicting this notion, the question “How about those who do not believe in
god? Are they disqualified from being moral?”. Of course not. As I have said earlier, there is no
universal definition of morality that can be applied to every single discussion about morality.

In conclusion, the presence of theses and antitheses for each and every definition of ethics
and morality that I have discussed in this paper somewhat balances each concept and validates
the concepts. Also, in my opinion, it creates room for the dynamicism these concept for the
ever-changing world.
REFERENCES:
Gensler, et al., 2004, Defending Cultural Relativism, retrieved on March 11, 2020 from
Ethics: Contemporary Readings pp. 43-47
Gensler, et al., 2004, Against Cultural Relativism, retrieved on March 11, 2020 from Ethics:
Contemporary Readings pp. 50-55
Gensler, et al., 2004, Ethical Claims Describe Feelings, retrieved on March 11, 2020 from
Ethics: Contemporary Readings pp. 58-60
Gensler, et al., 2004, Ethical Claims Are Objective, retrieved on March 11, 2020 from Ethics:
Contemporary Readings pp. 63-68
Gensler, et al., 2004, Moral Law IS From God, retrieved on March 11, 2020 from Ethics:
Contemporary Readings pp. 70-76
Gensler, et al., 2004, Love of God and Neighbor, retrieved on March 11, 2020 from Ethics:
Contemporary Readings pp. 78-81