Critiquing Approaches to Ethical Reasoning

Critiquing Approaches to Ethical Reasoning

Chapter 3 in Rosenstand’s The Moral of the Story Deals with the Issue of Moral Truth—What Is the Morally Right Thing to do in a Particular Situation, and what are the Correct Principles or Guidelines for Living a Morally Good Life?

Based on the principle of ethical relativism, nothing is entirely morally right to do. Ethical relativism avers that there is no universal set of rules that are supposed to guide people’s behaviour. Instead, people should live according to their culture’s reference to what is right and wrong. The principle of ethical relativism also emphasizes the need to respect and not tamper with others’ interpretation of what is right or wrong as long as other people also respect our viewpoint of right and wrong. In the long run, ethical relativism establishes the right attitude to tolerate one another by acting as an antidote to cultures that try to impose their rules on others. I believe moral relativism is good because it fosters a sense of mutual respect among diverse communities.

To understand the principle of ethical relativism, consider the case when some German women tourists were raped apparently for dressing indecently according to Islamic standards. There was varied opinion on the issue, with some Islamic conservatives saying that the victims were dressed invitingly and that their rape was deserved. However, that is not right to say because these women were dressed according to the standards of their culture (Rosenstand, 2018). Germany and other Western cultures allow women to address freely as they would individually wish to dress. That means if the rape culprits had tolerated the women since they were innocently dressed according to the standards of their culture, the rape incident would not have occurred. Apart from cultural customs, ethical relativism also supports religious tolerance across different religions. Hire our assignment writing services if your assignment is devastating you.

Ethical relativism aligns with the common saying, ‘When in Rome, do as the Romans do.’ While it is understandable why individuals strongly defend the ethics linked with their cultural background, it is also important to understand that other people feel about their culture as much (Jacko, 2019). Therefore, there is no need to create animosity between conflicting cultures. Instead, people who find themselves interacting with others from diverse cultural backgrounds should embrace them and learn from one another.

In summary, I believe that the basis of what is morally right and wrong depends on an individual’s cultural background. There are no rules to guide individual behaviour cast on stone. People should behave according to the dictates of their culture while appreciating the diversity that there are diverse cultures. Also, individuals should not force others to align with specific ethical standards.

References

Jacko, J. (2019). 30 Other Moral Theories: Subjectivism, Relativism, Emotivism, Intuitionism, etc.https://ruj.uj.edu.pl/xmlui/bitstream/handle/item/77707/jacko_other_moral_theories_2019.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

Rosenstand, N. (2018). The moral of the story: an introduction to ethics (8th ed.). Mcgraw-Hill Education.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

We’ll write everything from scratch

Critical Essay Response: For this week’s second discussion forum, refer back to the set of four controlling questions you responded to in Discussion 1 for this week and select one question for treatment in a more structured and fully developed critical essay in the range of 500-750 words in length. This second weekly discussion asks you to write a short critical essay that provides a more detailed and thought-through answer to the particular question you chose to study more closely from among the four you addressed more briefly earlier in the week. Your main purpose in a critical essay is to do the following:

Critiquing Approaches to Ethical Reasoning

Lay out the issue or theme under discussion.
State your position on the issue (this is your thesis or central claim of the essay).
Provide evidence that supports the truth of your thesis and establishes your position as the correct or best position.
Re-state your thesis and summarize your argument(s) (your evidence or reasons why), emphasizing your most important insights or findings.
Remember, your task here is to analyze and evaluate, not simply to describe or report information. For more detailed instructions, please read the Critical Essay Guidelines. The critical essay response is due by end of Saturday each week of the course.

Peer Critique: For the second round of peer comments, you are asked to post a single longer critical commentary, which we’ll call a “critique,” in response to a peer author’s in-depth critical essay. In essence, a critique is an evaluation; its special features are analysis and evidence to support the evaluation. Specifically, the critique you are being asked to write for this final weekly peer comment is a critique of another author’s argument—this will be the argument driving the peer author’s critical essay. What you will be focusing on in your peer critique is the reasoning behind the peer author’s position, not necessarily their skill in communicating it; that is to say, you will not be “grading” your peers’ work—you will be driving down below the surface of language (to the extent possible in this case) to analyze (take apart) the assumptions, claims, and conclusions of the peer critical essay, then evaluate (synthesize) the overall position taken in that essay.

It is extremely important to remember that you are evaluating the position and the reasoning supporting it, not the person. It is also important to note that a critique or critical commentary may be positive, negative, or a mixture of the two. We tend to use the word, “criticize,” or the expression, “being critical” with a mostly negative connotation, as in finding fault with something or “putting something (or someone) down.” That is not the intention here, although part of what you’re doing in writing a critique may indeed be finding fault. But the faults you are pointing out will have nothing to do with the author himself or herself. You will be looking for errors in reasoning and argumentation, in reporting of relevant facts or information, in overlooking or misconstruing important points relevant to the question posed, and so on.

While precision and clarity in thought and written expression and overall comprehensibility of the written response is crucial for communicating the author’s position and supporting argumentation, your focus should be primarily directed to the position on the issue in question and the reasons advanced for why that is the correct or best position. You need not cite any sources in your critiques, but you are free to do so.

Don’t forget to review the document, “Writing a Critique of Another Person’s Argument” in addition to the Critical Essay Guidelines. Your critique should be in the range of 200-400 words in length and is due by end of Sunday each week of the course. Don’t forget to review the Discussion Forum Guidelines and the document “Critical Essays and Critiques: Tip Sheet” for more information on how to approach this assignment. Also remember to review the grading rubric for your Discussion 2 responses and peer critique: Grading Rubric for Weekly Discussion 2 Topics