Theories Of Ethical Relativism

Ethical relativism is at theory which puts forth the notion that values and ethical judgments can only be evaluated within the context of individuals or cultural groups. An ethical relativist would argue that there are no such things as an objective right or wrong when it comes to the views that he hold. If this were true, there would not be much of a point to doing ethics at all. I would have my beliefs, you would have yours, and neither of us could be right or wrong because right and wrong could only be compared relative to our own value system. This is obviously not that case.

The use of coercive force can be viewed as being objectively bad. Coercion is defined as the practice of persuading someone to do something under the threat of force. I specify coercive force and not force in general because there are certain cases, such as self-defense, where force may be used for self-preservation …show more content…
Consider the case of a seriously ill, but potentially curable patient. The patient has a disease which may be cured if the patient were to undergo extensive and exhaustive treatment. He or she may live the next year or so with a quite poor quality of life, and the treatment may still not save their life. If the patient were to refuse treatment, some may say that it would be just to coerce this person into receiving treatment because it may save their life. It is wrong to force people to do something which they have not chosen, even if you believe the outcome is in their best interest. A reasonable person has an inherent right to do what they decide is in their own best interest, given that it does not harm others. This patient may have decided that if there is a fair chance they may die from their disease, they would rather have the chance to live out that remaining time with what health they have left. This is a personal decision which should only be made by that