The Problems of Moral Absolutism

An Analysis

Abstract

Moral absolutism holds that human actions should be guided and assessed by some absolute principles which are inviolable. That is, moral principles are context-neutral and applicable for all societies, cultures and for every human being. But we often find ourselves perplexed with the complexities of the situations in which we need to make a concrete decision and have to act accordingly. In this type of situations, only one simple principle may not be upheld without hesitations, since multiple considerations guided by equally significant principles are involved. Facing this type of situations while holding an absolutist outlook seems difficult. Thus, moral relativists claim that moral absolutism is not equipped enough to resolve the real-life issues or dilemmas which torment us often. This paper has analyzed the sources and types of moral absolutism and has suggested that moral absolutists have failed to provide proper justifications for their claims about the absoluteness or the inviolability of the moral standards and principles they consider to be absolute. This research also has pointed out and discussed the conceptual errors the absolutists have made in their proposals. Finally, this paper has shown that the problems of moral absolutism are not easy to resolve, since it requires to compromise the basic assumption, that moral principles are absolute and inviolable, on which the absolutist outlook relies on.