• Philosophy -> Ethics and Morality

• 0 Comment

Can moral absolutism be considered harmful to the progression of human rights?

Ephriam Waterman

Morality is about what people think is right and wrong. Some people believe in moral absolutism, which means that there are clear rights and wrongs that apply to everyone, all the time. But others believe that morality is relative, which means that what is right or wrong depends on the situation.

Moral absolutism can be harmful to the progression of human rights if it is taken too far. For example, if someone believes that it is always wrong to kill another person, they might be against the death penalty even for people who have committed terrible crimes. But if someone else believes that the death penalty is sometimes necessary to protect society, they might think that moral absolutism is standing in the way of progress.

Similarly, if someone believes that some behaviors are always wrong, they might judge and condemn people who engage in those behaviors, even if there are good reasons for doing so. This can prevent progress on issues like LGBTQ+ rights, as some people might see homosexuality as a moral issue rather than a matter of individual choice.

However, we should not abandon moral absolutism altogether. There are some things that are always wrong, such as torture and slavery. Without a clear moral framework, it can be difficult to make progress on human rights issues.

In conclusion, moral absolutism can be harmful to human rights if it is taken too far. We need to balance our moral principles with an understanding of the complexities of the world around us, and be willing to look at issues from different perspectives in order to make progress.