“There truly are [ or are non ] ‘absolutes’ upon which a cosmopolitan truth can be based that can be applied for set uping ethical behaviour in concern. ” The universe of concern would be such a helter-skelter topographic point sans cosmopolitan truth that can be applied to set up ethical behaviour. If they are no “absolutes” so everything else is comparative ; that province of being depends on how many factors and those factors include how one feels on a certain issue. the norms in a society that one lives in. the definition of right and incorrect being subjective. and spiritual beliefs.
In the case where an person will move as they feel and non per cosmopolitan absolute truth. so the person may make up one’s mind non to pay for the services rendered to them or ware that they procured because that is how the single feels about the state of affairs even if the renderer of service or marketer may experience that they ought to be paid for their services or goods. They feelings in this instance are merely true to them and non the purchaser as the purchaser has a different feeling about the state of affairs.
In the instance where the norms of a society dictate the ethical behaviour of a society. it would besides intend that there is comparative subjectiveness to the whole impression of moralss as societies can hold norms which are non at wholly right as seen in the instance of the Hutus and Tutsis in Rwanda. The Hutus were a bulk ( 85 % ) of the population and through political propaganda they were incited to kill the minority Tutsis ( 14 % ) . 800. 000 people were murdered in the name of tribal cleaning and at that point in clip it was alright for a Hutu to kill a Tutsi as per what had become the norm.
The full universe condemned this sordid move even though it was comparatively “right” in the Hutu society. This might sound utmost but it merely shows us a norm in a society does non do it a right thing to be done. The same applies for concern in that what is a norm for concern in one society would be considered gross corruptness in another and besides what might intend unity in one society would be condemned in another as deficiency of concern acumen as in non being able to accept concern chances irrespective of how the can be obtained.
We can non therefore basal ethical behaviour on social norms and behaviours and non to state that they are non any of those norms that are acceptable and of really high criterions that could really good be ethical. nevertheless the The definition of right or incorrect if treated as comparative topic will act upon the manner one perceives issues in footings of being ethical or unethical. When right and incorrect is comparative it means what might be right for one might merely be incorrect for me. there is no absolutes. A classical illustration is the Nigerian in-migration as it supposedly used to be in past. this author does non hold first manus cognition of the said cases.
It is said that when one travelled to Nigeria. one could non acquire their passport stamped by the in-migration officer if they did non set some money in the passport. The officer would manus one dorsum the passport and rede them that there is a ”page” missing in the passport. The “page” meant a dollar measure. For people who grew up in that tradition it was an expected thing to make and that was how it was supposed to be purportedly but for a alien. say an American. that would be so incorrect a thing to make because in the USA. that is perverting a public officer and that is a offense in itself that one could travel to imprison for.
There is the issue of spiritual beliefs and faith and deficiency thereof. It is said that spiritual beliefs help to further stronger ethical behaviour. as faiths tend to be black and white on what is incorrect and what is right. Yet there are different faiths and gratuitous to state the different faiths have different sets of ideals whether it be moralss or ethical motives. To foreground that is the tragic instance of Sept11. 2011 when the USA was attacked by the Muslim terrorists.
These terrorists harmonizing to what they believed. they were making the right thing and had been taught so that when they die like that they are sufferers of their faith and they will travel to heaven for making the will of their God. Beliefs in the different faiths vary and notwithstanding those without any faith. it is sensible to state that in this instance it is comparative as in what a individual believes in. If there has to be consistence in any dealing of concern. there hence has to be absolutes upon which a cosmopolitan truth can be based that can be applied for set uping ethical behaviour.
It should non count how one feels. what norms are in one’s society. how one defines right or incorrect. and what one’s spiritual beliefs are. There are perfectly ethical elements in all the above that can be applied to all concern moralss to heighten the ethical behaviour but there decidedly should be a criterion that is cosmopolitan and expected to be followed by all involved in concern. It is so cardinal because it is the footing on which all concern is traveling to be transacted upon. One can non travel into concern with a spouse who will run one out of concern or person who will non make what they say they will make and make it right.