The Instigator
Pro (for)
2 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
5 Points

Morality is not Relative

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/19/2013 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 612 times Debate No: 34900
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)




Morality is not relative becuase becuase is it absolute. Morality is absolute becuase there needs to be one set standard the world should follow. If there are many standards their would be mass confusion not knowing right from wrong not questioning it. Having to think what is right would make it subjective. Therefore, morality is not relative becuase it is subjective.


I argue that it is not the case that all societies follow one rule. I conclude the claim morality is not relative is false. Morality is solely based on the interpretations of that society and their incorporations of right and wrong.
1.Not all societies follow one rule
2.Two different geographical locations can have the same behavior but differ in the right or wrong of that action.
3.There is no set rule that is known to man that everyone follows.
4.There is no evidence to support one moral rule.
5.Morality differs from society to society
6.Therefore, morality is contingent upon the society
7.Every society base there morals upon the nature of their principles.
8.Thus, morality holds some relativity.
Debate Round No. 1


If societies followed one rule because it would not be right not to judge someone of a crime becuase they have simply followed one standard from their ancestors. Having a many standards can lead to slow progression in a society.


Morality is not subjective as you have claim "morality is not relative becuase it is subjective."
Subjective simple means that an individual based their position for or against something based on feeling.
In this I argue that any different society due based there moral beliefs on feeling. Different societies follow different beliefs on what is right or wrong based on how that is perceived oby that society. Therefore if a society feels that rape is illegal or against there moral rules thatn that action is now against what that society holds.

you argue "many standards can lead to slow progression in a society" i don't agree what that claim. Based on the progression of so many different societies. i state the point that in fact many differnt standards have helped societies grow, especially when we take a look at a diverse nation such as the United States, they have taken the standards of other society and used them to better their own.

when a society is oposed to the experiences and standards of other societies we can see in history where they have all fallen. the mogool empire is for one, and even the great roman empire fell.
standards is not the word you want to use here. it would better suit your argument if you used the moral beliefs of these societies.
Because we can find in many nation where there standards differ somewhat from their moral beliefs.
Debate Round No. 2


I belive the United states is on of the few countries that have progressed thoughout the years becuase of havinbg a moral standard to live by. If we didn't slavery would not have been abloished becuase we would have to question ourselves before we thought it was wrong. In countries like in the documentary that we watched with marrage kidnapping, if they had a standard they wouldnt think twice about doing that. Thos countries may have too many standards. The women did not seem to be ok with being kidnapped, even though they accepted it it is clear that they need a standard in place to give women rights.


Morality holds some relativity, as I stated before. There is not one moral rule that all societies follow that is known by anyone. Yes, there are similarities in morals but I stand that that supports my claim that different "moral beliefs" not standards are a sign of progression, and with that these society were able to survive.
Survival is the key to the progression of societies, and that is why societies differ in their moral beliefs, because they were able to adapt to their environment and progress. They were able to find what was suitable for their geographical location and apply that to their laws, now standards, and morals.

I disagree with with you claim that "United states is on of the few countries that have progressed thoughout the years" however will not adress it due to lack of time.

I take your claim "marrage kidnapping, if they had a standard they wouldnt think twice about doing that. Thos countries may have too many standards. The women did not seem to be ok with being kidnapped, even though they accepted it it is clear that they need a standard in place to give women rights" And dispute it by saying marriage kidnapping is acceptable by few people in that society. it is against the law in that society as well. Anything that infringes upon individauls personl rights each society has their laws on that. i do however belief that that society lacks outside information in order for them to progresss. The have not taken "standards" as you have put it from other socities in oder for them to progress.

And even ifi went against myself and said even if they have to many standards, they have progressed, because based new laws old ones have been changed. Wife kidnapping is illlegal in that society and if they were caught by the authorities they would have face the punishments in place for that action for that society.
Debate Round No. 3


You say that there is no evidence to support one moral rule, but I would have to dissagree. We have the bible and within the bible we can trace back evidence to where there is a moral standard. If we didnt have such things like the bible we wouldnt know what was right from wrong. So I think that is a subjective claim becuase you can find evidence from societies like countries as Japan that are thriving countries. I beleieve there are individuals that don't agree with the bible or Koran or whatever document their country believes in and forms thier own rougue way of thinking. As in the kidnappings they are illegal but because a few individuals want to follow a tradition that has been used centuries ago it makes that whole counrty look like they lack any standards and progression. I believe that people's belief is what slows down progression becuase belief is what you think making it subjective. Becuase you "think" its right doesnt make it right for a whole nation. Standards can be set into stone what a majority is comfortable with not the minority making it easier for progression.


Yes, i see where you are coming from, however They are the "standards" of religion not the standards of societies. The United States as in all societies remove religion from that "standards" they hold. Religious "standards have been held seperate from the :"standards" of the society.

one Beliefs can cause society to not progress i agree, and you have also that more moral beliefds shows progression by this statement. Therefore there are many different moral beliefs that help societies progress. if a soceity only had one they would not grow.

i take your claim "you "think" its right doesnt make it right' and apply it to your arguement.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by effimero89 5 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:25 
Reasons for voting decision: ,,,,