Moral absolutism in our society


Many philosophers argued over the existence of moral absolutism. Moral absolutism defines the extent at which an act within the society can be accepted or rejected. This is where the line between right and wrong is drawn. It is as difficult as cracking a nut in determining whether moral absolutes really exist in our society. According to (Descartes & Anscombe, 1970) our society is made of diverse personality, who believes in different ideologies based on the school of thought they originate or base their reasoning. Rene Descartes argued on matters concerning morality and he was categorical that absolute morals can be only achieved on an individual capacity.

Moral absolutism in our society

Having or embracing moral absolutism in our society can be brought into real life setting where one handcuffs him/herself and heads to the battlefield. The society is dynamic what might have been deemed wrong or right in the past may have changed currently or will change in the near future. For instance each member of a society irrespective of his/her originality, race, social class, religion or ethnic deems theft as morally wrong. Anyone who is caught doing the act is liable to the authority and faces the judiciary system practiced by the society. What the society fails to understand is that one may steal not because he wishes to steal. Recently a guy was caught stealing in a supermarket in Nairobi, Kenya but he claimed he didn’t want to steal and he could figure out how those items found their way into his pocket. In this case I find it not logic to accuse the gut over theft since there were other forces that led or rather used him in executing the act.

Setting standards on which human being should operate within can never be possible bearing in mind different events either good or bad occur to the society and both events may need good or bad acts to salvage the moment (Moser, 1968). For instance, in case there is a fire break-out in your neighborhood and there is no one in the house other than a two-year-old kid. It is well known that if one enters into a house of someone without permission is trespass and one is liable for prosecution. Since this is a matter of life and death to the kid also proximity of the house can result to massive damage to your house. In this scenario, there is no moral absolutism since one has to break the set morals to help the kid and preventing massive destruction.

In most cases, the religion supports the existence of moral absolutism. Religion always tends to advocate for perfection which is a tall order in any given society. This makes it hard for the congregation to play their roles since one is forced to imitate or rather live someone else life. Absolute in morality


As much as we all need to keep our society in order it is important to understand that moral absolutism should not confine or handcuff members of the society. The society is diverse and dynamic and therefore the morals should also be dynamic. According to (Moser, 1968) A rigid moral control system will fail the society and the world at large. Therefore, human being should be set free to decide what is morally right and wrong in any given circumstance. The society on the other hand should not be fast in judging one’s action.


Descartes, R., & Anscombe, E. (1970). Philosophical writings, by rene descartes (pbk) (Rev. ed.). S.l.: Nelson’s University paperbacks.

Moser, S. (1968). Absolutism and relativism in ethics. Springfield, Ill.: Thomas.


"Are you looking for this answer? We can Help click Order Now"