Question

Is that actions or concepts are all relative to each other. While there might be an objective truth that murder is wrong for example, there are things worse than murder, and things not as bad as murder. So while we can say murder is bad, we can't say it is the worst I believe this relies on human understanding as imperfect. We will never truly be able to grasp reality as it exists.

Answer 1

Moral judgments and the concepts of 'good' and 'evil' can be seen as relative within the framework of normative ethical relativism, which posits that there is no absolute moral truth. Philosophical debate continues on whether objective moral truths exist, as argued by moral realists, in contrast to the relativistic perspective. The complexity of moral philosophy reflects ongoing disputes about what constitutes 'right' and 'wrong.'

Step-by-step explanation:

The discussion here revolves around the concept of normative ethical relativism, which suggests that moral judgments and actions are relative and that there is no universal moral truth that applies in all situations. This perspective challenges the idea that actions such as murder, or any other moral categorizations, have absolute moral values. The belief is that our moral compasses are the byproducts of individual societal norms and personal experiences, hence the notion of relativism. However, objections arise when one considers universal human experiences and a shared moral logic. Kant's deontological ethics, for instance, emphasizes duties that are universally rational—a contrast to relativism. Meanwhile, moral realists advocate for the existence of moral facts, arguing against the fact-value distinction, and implying some degree of objectivity in moral judgments.

Philosophical debates also explore the idea that knowledge of objective reality, including moral truths, is limited or even unattainable. Yet, the lack of absolute certainty does not imply the absence of objective truths. For example, the idea of a universal code of conduct is contested by some, while others, like Kant, argue for rational, universal ethical principles.

Ultimately, the question of whether actions are the absolute worst, equally bad, or not as bad as one another is not definitive within the framework of normative ethical relativism. These considerations point to the complexity of moral philosophy and the continuous debates surrounding the attempt to understand what is truly 'right' or 'wrong.'