Especially sense‚ as according to the polls taken in Pojman’s philosophy classes‚ about two thirds of students affirmed moral relativism‚ meaning that if everyone in the school believed it was morally right to cheat - then it was right to cheat (Pojman‚ 242). Let’s assume a situation where your friend tells you she’s planning on cheating on her exam‚ and justifies her plan on the grounds that cheating is the norm at her school. In this situation‚ the student may fully believe she is acting morally
Premium Morality Ethics
it would stop possible murderers from killing innocent people‚ therefore saving innocent lives. Even though there is no evidence to show deterrence it is pretty obvious that deterrence would happen with capital punishment. In his argument for capital punishment Pojman brings up the lightening scenario. Which is a scenario where every time a person commits murder there are then struck and killed by a bolt of lightening. If fellow future murderers see every murderer being struck by lightening then
Premium Capital punishment Crime Death penalty
Ethical Relativism is the belief that nothing is objectively right or wrong and that the meaning of what is right and wrong depends on the individual and culture. Pojman breaks down Ethical Relativism into 2 main concepts: The Diversity Theory and the Dependency Theory. The Diversity Theory addresses the concept of what is morally right and wrong varies from society to society; therefore‚ there is no universal moral principles that all societies accept. For example‚ Homosexuality in the Middle East
Premium Morality Cultural relativism Ethics
take a life‚ you deserve to get your life taken away‚ a life for a life. Louis Pojman and Jeffrey Reiman have debated this issue very closely‚ coming up with two opposite opinions on capital punishment. I will argue that even though I can see why Pojman thinks the way he does‚ he just doesn’t have enough evidence to back up his thesis when comparing it to Reiman’s. I will suggest an adjusted version of Pojman’s argument on deterrence for capital punishment by looking
Premium Capital punishment Murder Crime
Louis Pojman argues for objectivism instead of relativism in morality even though we are attracted to the idea of relativism. Ethical relativism is made up of a diversity thesis and a dependency thesis. The diversity thesis is also known as cultural relativism and basically states that morality is different between different societies. The dependency thesis is similar to the diversity thesis‚ but states that morality depends on the context of the society. There are two views on the dependency
Premium Morality Ethics
Morality and ethics create the bridge between the savage and rational side of each human being. With the intent of explaining morality‚ Pojman displays three different types of ethical backgrounds. The first being ethical relativism which states that an individual’s beliefs and activities should be understood by others in terms of the person’s own culture. This idea explains whether or not morality is only a fragment of a person’s cultural norm instead of anything truly universal. For example‚ in
Premium Morality Ethics Sociology
Louis Pojman stands for objectivism instead of relativism in morality. Ethical relativism is “the theory that there are no universally valid moral principles”. Ethical relativism however is different from moral doubt where valid moral principles do not exist at all. Pojman argues that what is considered as morally right or wrong varies from society to society. Pojman proposes that ethical relativism can be seen as a good thing but can get hard when getting into the details. Ethical relativism is
Premium Morality Ethics Truth
burnt alive.. From there it can be found in seventh B.C.’s Draconian Code‚ and even in eighteenth century B.C. through the Code of King Hammurabi of Babylon‚ in which twenty-five various crimes would lead to the death penalty (Part I‚ 2015). Though the crimes punishable under the death penalty and the methods of which the death penalty have changed over time‚ the ideology behind the method still stands the same: An eye for an eye. The argument for the death penalty stands that those who commit a crime
Premium Capital punishment Murder Crime
the "marvels and mysteries of the world" (Pojman xi) we live in. Keeping in mind that only a human being has the intellectual capacity to take on such deliberation‚ humans should be the sole beneficiaries of any morals or ethical rights derived from philosophical inspection. To suggest the possibility that our ethical rights could be transferable to non-human animals is a direct slap in the face to every philosopher that ever existed. According to Pojman‚ ethics include both theory and application
Premium Morality Animal rights Human
properly ascertain the individual components as well as the overall success of Bush’s work‚ this article deploys the use of a general summary‚ followed by a section of critical interaction‚ and finally a conclusion. In the end‚ elements of Bush’s argument prove invaluable‚ while others miss their target. Summary Chapter 1 begins with an historical review of the modern worldview formation. This includes first the secular worldview‚ inspired by the focus on freedom inherent in the Enlightenment
Premium Truth Reality