C.S. Lewis on Moral Relativism

In: Philosophy and Psychology

Submitted By jams271
Words 448
Pages 2
Lewis’ main objections to moral relativism.
C.S. Lewis brings to light several points about relativism that demonstrate its lack of footing. Moral relativism cannot be its own judge of right or wrong. Further, what themselves would call our instincts, cannot provide evidence for guiding us to determine that any side of any issue is right or wrong. The deciding factor must be a set of principles that are entrenched deep within our ability to reason, with built in burdening mechanisms that help us to decide right from wrong, aside from what our true desires may be. These morals just cannot manifest themselves or be made up as we go; they are based upon principles put in place by an outside force as the foundation for life. Additionally, Morals are very similar across cultures. Not to a granular extent, but more on a foundational level in order that we may coexist better with each other. Moral laws speak not in the sense of how a person behaves, but specifically how they should behave. Moral laws do not have properties as other laws do in life. As Lewis puts it: “…when you are dealing with humans, something else comes in above and beyond the actual facts. You have the facts (how men do behave) and you also have something else (how they ought to behave)”. (2007, p. 25) It is that knowledge of how we should behave that separates a Moral law from any other law, and the fact that the very idea of it is inescapable to us.

My position.
Morals cannot vary from each individual and be found to be good. There must be evidential meaning in the foundations of the belief. In other words, it cannot be considered good to commit an act of evil. Sets of moral beliefs that are common to man are built upon a truth that is put inside of us by an entity having the intellect and power to do so and that being is God. Should we not have been given this ability to…...

Similar Documents

Moral Relativism and Moral Objectivism

...outline, explain and critically discuss the strengths and weaknesses of moral relativism. Every choice we make is due to each person’s individual morality and rationality. In this view, Norman (1988: 188) contends that, “Morality is premised on the assumption of individual responsibility.” Morality is concerned with the free choice of rational human beings, and not the non-rational. Louis (2002:28) further adds that morality, “Is just the set of common rules, habbits, and customs that have won social approval over time so that they seem part of things, like facts.” Moral relativism shows that there are no absolute moral rules and each situation needs to be examined individually. Therefore moral relativism is the belief that morality does not relate to any absolute standards of right and wrong but good and bad are dependent on culture and circumstance or judgment paradigm. Thus different moral truths hold for different people from society to society or at different periods in time. The fact that some people see moral relativism as an obvious truth which is undeniable needs no preamble. Needless to mention, others perceive moral relativism as threatening to the moral foundation on which society is founded. According to moral relativists there is nothing that is absolutely, invariably right or wrong, and there is no universal standard by which to measure our character or our actions. According to moral relativism, it is never true to say simply that a certain kind of......

Words: 1601 - Pages: 7

Cs Lewis

...The Time Of Narnia Sam Duncan . C.S. Lewis had a very happy and carefree childhood. Thankfully, his only little problem was people persistantly called him C.S. Lewis but he really wanted to be called Jack. He lived in a huge house in the town of Belfast, which is in Ireland. Jack and his older brother Warren spent their time romping around in their beautiful garden outside the house. When they were not out, Jack was in the library happily reading. This might not have been as happy and carefree to most people, but Jack loved it. Even though Jack had a happy childhood, his happiness came to an end. Tragiclly, his mother sadly passed away after being very ill in 1908. As if that was not bad enough, Jack and Warren had to go away to boarding school in England only a month after their mother's death. Jack hated this school because all of...

Words: 324 - Pages: 2

Cs Lewis

...Clive Staples Lewis “I want God, you, all my friends, merely to serve my turn.’ (As the Ruin Falls) C.S. Lewis was an atheist his whole life but became a very strong believer of God when he grew older. He wrote “After Prayers Lie Cold” and “As the Ruin Falls” about searching for God, love and happiness. Lewis’ mother died in 1908 when Lewis was only ten years old. His father was never the same after she passed away. Around that time Lewis and his brother were enrolled in boarding school. While at boarding school Lewis became an atheist, which changed his life drastically. During World War I Lewis became very close friends with a man named Paddy Moore. Sadly, Paddy died fighting in the war. Soon after that, Lewis was wounded and was discharged. When Lewis returned home he followed up on a promise that he had made to Paddy that he would take care of Paddy’s mother and sister. Mrs. Moore treated Lewis like a son. Lewis bought a house which he lived in with Paddy’s family up until Mrs. Moore died and his sister was old enough to get along on her own. (About C.S. Lewis) In 1939 during World War II Lewis and his brother took in children from London seeking refuge from bombings. During that time Lewis wrote one of his greatest books called “The Screwtape Letters”. It was one of Lewis’ best books, but he admits that it was difficult to write. The book was Lewis’ first Christian success. It portrays a person trying to live a Christian life with temptations as seen from the......

Words: 859 - Pages: 4

Difference Between Moral Absolutism and Relativism

...Explain the difference between moral absolutism and relativism (25) There are two different ways in distinguishing whether something is right or wrong within ethics. Absolutism is a deontological theory, which determines whether an action is intrinsically right or wrong. Whereas relativism is a teleological theory, which determines whether an action is right or wrong based on the outcomes of the action, on its consequences, this is linked with situation ethics and consequentialism. They are two different ways in approaching ethics. Absolutism is a moral command that is objectively and universally right or wrong for all people, in all times, places and cultures. It can be said to be deontological and so something is either right or wrong intrinsically (in itself) and therefore consequences have no bearing. Whereas, relativism is a subjective theory and believe that all truth is relative and dependent upon the values of an individual or society or even situation. Relativism is a teleological approach and therefore takes into account the consequences of a situation. Therefore there are many differences between moral absolutism and relativism. An example of absolutism would be the Ten Commandments, that Natural Law portrays, which are absolute, ‘do not murder’, as this is a law that applies to everyone. Therefore an absolutist would say that it is always wrong to murder in every, and any situation. In contrast, a relativist might argue that in some situations, given the......

Words: 656 - Pages: 3

Utilitarianism, Ethical Egoism, and Moral Relativism

...Utilitarianism, Ethical Egoism, and Moral Relativism Tom Gardner Ethics is a branch of philosophy that attempts to answer the questions; what’s right? What’s wrong? And why? Moral relativism is an ethics position that essentially states that people have disagreeing moral beliefs and therefore you must but tolerant of other's morals. This position leads to the problematic realization that if this is the case there can be no objective moral truths nor can there be any universal principles. Act utilitarianism and ethical egoism are two different ethics theories that attempt to respond to this challenge of moral relativism in different ways. Ethical egoism attempts to respond to the challenge of moral relativism by justifying that there is a universal principle for what actions are right and what are wrong. It is a form of consequentialism, which means it looks solely at the consequences of action to see if it is right or wrong. The defining sentence of egoism is as follows, “What's good for you is right and what's bad for you is wrong.” This phrase can be interpreted in a number of ways, the most popular one being: every person should act in their own self-interest. This means that when deciding on whether an action is good, any effect on others (mental or physical) by said action has no merit. An egoist that is measuring or justifying an action's goodness is only examining the possible positive or negative effects this action will have on him. The majority of the......

Words: 1382 - Pages: 6

Moral Relativism

...Moral relativism Moral relativism is the philosophical theory that morality is relative that different moral truths hold for different people in different cultural. According to moral relativism, there is no goodness or badness in the abstract; there is only goodness or badness within a specified context. An act may thus be good in one cultural setting but bad in another, but cannot be either good or bad full stop. Those who reject relativism, of course, have arguments of their own: In some cases, it does seem to be right to judge one culture to be morally superior to another, to make cross-cultural comparisons. To make cross-cultural comparisons, though, one needs a cross-cultural standard, which is precisely what moral relativism says there isn’t. Not only does moral relativism entail that we cannot make legitimate moral comparisons of different cultures, it also entails that we cannot make legitimate moral comparisons of a single culture across time; we cannot judge whether a changing society is getting better or worse. Generally, though, we do think that we have made moral progress. Moral relativism, arguably, cannot make sense of this. Moral philosophy Moral philosophy refers to the basic rules or principles that people use to decide what is right or wrong. Although there is no single moral philosophy that every culture, every nation, even every people accepts, there are still some moralities are widely accepted. Such as honest, integrity, and fairness which was......

Words: 267 - Pages: 2

C.S. Lewis Essay

...C. S. Lewis, or "Jack", as he was known to friends and family, was born Clive Staples Lewis on November 29, 1898, in Belfast, Ireland. His father, Albert Lewis, was a successful lawyer. Albert and Flora Lewis brought up their two sons in a Protestant household. Warren was Lewis's older brother, and the two were very close. The family home was affectionately nicknamed "Little Lea", and was a treasure trove of books in which Lewis' imagination blossomed. The stability and happiness of Lewis's childhood, however, was shattered by his mother's death in 1908 from abdominal cancer. Lewis was nine years old at the time. The death of Lewis's mother proved incredibly influential on the development of the writer's commitment to Christianity. Just prior to her death, Flora gave each of her sons a parting gift: a Bible, inscribed with a message of her love. Lewis, however, reacted to the gift with anger and grief, and became an atheist. In 1914, at the age of 16, he moved to southern England and came under the tutelage of William T. Kirkpatrick. Kirkpatrick was a former headmaster, a rationalist, and a humanist; in Kirkpatrick, Lewis found a tutor and role model, and learned to discipline himself in writing and reason. Lewis was admitted to University College at Oxford, and in 1917 he volunteered for active combat in France. He returned to his studies in 1919. Lewis ultimately graduated with top honors in literature, philosophy, and history. He was subsequently elected to the......

Words: 784 - Pages: 4

Help with Discussion About C.S. Lewis,

...Once again, I am blown away by the sheer wisdom God has given C.S. Lewis. In the selection we read, Lewis explains His definition of faith and explains what he believes we have reason for. He first explains that faith and reason seem to have to work together. Lewis asks people to not just follow Christianity if they feel that it does not make sense. He believes that would contradict faith, giving it one of the first meanings. He also tells the reader to hold onto his faith despite his mood. He reminds us that our moods should weigh very little when we decide what we are going to believe. He explains that we should remind ourselves why we believe what we do by praying, reading the Bible and continously going to church. He also seems to define faith by making it hold hands with humility. He informs us that not until we are at our lowest do we learn about ourselves and that just because a man is good it does not meam he does not know tempation. Only Jesus knew the extent of temptation and we know He is the definition of perfection. Faith should remind us that everything we do for God will never be enough. Just like a child asking for money to buy his parent a gift, we use the gifts He gives us to show Him our love back! Lewis also shames my definition of reason by saying that anything we don't understand we should just move on from. He asks us not to dwell on Christian writings and even anything he says if we don't understand what he's talking about right now to not dwell on it...

Words: 465 - Pages: 2

Moral Relativism

...Moral Relativism Moral relativism is the “view that ethical standards, morality, and positions of right or wrong are either culturally-based or subject to a person’s individual choice” (Klement, 2006). Most people hold to the concept that what is right and what is wrong is not absolute and that morals can be altered from one situation to the next based on these subjective choices. Individual moral relativism views that what is ethically right is relative to each individual person according to their own moral standards or ethical system (Yount, 2012). To elaborate: if a John Doe believes that stealing office supplies for personal use is ethical, it is; if Jane Doe believes that stealing office supplies for personal use is unethical, it is. Alternatively, cultural relativism views that what is ethically right is relative to one’s culture (Yount, 2012). For example: if Culture 1 believes cannibalism is ethical, it is; if Culture 2 believes cannibalism is unethical, it is. The main advantage of moral relativism is that it can allow people of different cultures or ideologies to co-exist together. However, disadvantages of relativism in morality would result in having no common framework for resolving moral disputes because the fundamental principles governing what acts are morally right or wrong vary from culture to culture or individual to individual (Klement, 2006). The third level of Kohlberg’s (1971) stages of ethical development asserts that individuals consider the......

Words: 569 - Pages: 3

Moral Relativism vs Moral

...Moral relativism vs Moral absolutism Moral Relativism Moral relativism is the insight that there are no obvious ethical truths and that moral facts are only relative to a given individual. According to this theory what is morally good for one person or culture might be morally bad for another, and vice versa: there are no moral absolutes. Moral relativism holds that ethical truths are of this latter kind. According to moral relativism, ethical truths are subjective rather than objective. This means that whether lying is wrong, for example, can vary from person to person or from culture to culture. It may be that for some people, or in some cultures, it is wrong, but that for other people, or in other cultures it isn‘t. In one mild form, moral relativism can seem obvious. Of course different people have different moral obligations: I have a duty to pay my credit card bill; you do not. Each of us is in different circumstances, and those circumstances affect what we ought and ought not to do. Morality is therefore relative to circumstances. Moral truths are relative to people or groups of people. Moral relativism holds that two different people in identical circumstances can, for no other reason than that they are different people, have different obligations. This is a much stronger claim than that morality is relative to circumstances. Moral absolutism Moral absolutism is the ethical theory which believes that there are always absolute rules of which moral questions can be......

Words: 506 - Pages: 3

C.S. Lewis on Suffering and Pain in the Christian Life

... LIBERTY UNIVERSITY BAPTIST THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY C.S. Lewis on Suffering and Pain in the Christian Life Submitted to Dr. Rodney Anderson, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the completion SEMI 500-B28 LUO Introduction to Seminary Studies by Abigail Strain September 28, 2014 Contents Introduction 1 What were the influential experiences of C. S. Lewis on the topic of pain and suffering? 3 A Heartbreaking foundation 3 C. S. Lewis Atheistic View 4 C. S. Lewis’ Conversion Experience 4 Theodicy 5 C. S. Lewis’ Views on Theodicy and Faith Theology 5 C. S. Lewis Theological views on Pain and Suffering and the Christian Life 6 Evangelizing the lost as seen through eyes of C.S. Lewis 6 Why Evangelize ? 6 Reaching the Lost in the Midst of Pain and Suffering 7 Conclusion 8 Bibliography 10 Introduction This paper will give the readers an understanding of C.S. Lewis’ views on pain and suffering. C.S Lewis’ works emphasize the quandary of theodicy, how pain and suffering originated and how it serves to mold and strengthen our life theology thus creating harmony within our souls (mind), The soul being your mind will and emotions (Deut 6:5), when these arise. C. S. Lewis was a complex individual who demonstrated his courage and shared his faith theology in the midst of his pain and suffering by writing the struggles he went......

Words: 3112 - Pages: 13

Pain and Suffering According to C.S. Lewis

...of theologian and scholar, C. S. Lewis. Answers will be sought through the examination of Lewis’s personal experiences, his theological studies and his fictional writings. This paper will prove that human pain and suffering is essential in the Christian experience by examining the reasons human suffer, why God does not intervene to prevent suffering, and how pain and suffering might build faith and draw people closer to God. The reality that Christians, who devote their lives to God suffer, is a source of angst for many. As humans develop, they assimilate every experience and thought they have had into the way they view and interpret the world around them. Every person in this world experiences pain and suffering at different levels including physical, emotional and spiritual. The fact that C.S. Lewis addresses this conflict in many of his fictional writings supports the fact that this has been a point of personal struggle for him. C.S. Lewis records that when he was still in the nursery, his mother gave him a picture book that contained images that created a sense of fear in him. The terror the pictures created was so great that A.N. Wilson, author of C.S. Lewis: A Biography describes the event as being Lewis’s, “…first experience of real fear and psychological pain.” It is interesting that what appears to be such a small event in the life of a child created a realization that pain exists in the human experience. The death of C.S. Lewis’s mother when he was eight...

Words: 2955 - Pages: 12


...Relativism was the subject of Module 4. Relativism understands ethics in terms of situations and options. What is “right” and ”wrong” in any situation is variable. “Right” is a matter of the person’s personal preference, bias, emotion, experience, culture, gender, age, socioeconomic group, and any other factor the individual deems important. In essence, the individual is his/her own higher power. Entitlement-based ethics or egoism is a special type of relativism. Deontology, the study of duty, which we explored in Modules 3 and 5, describes a variety of positions that understand ethics in terms of duty or obedience to universal principles regardless of the consequences. These universal principles could come from God, from human origins and nature, or from human reason. Instead of asking whether an action will result in a particular type of consequence, either good or bad, as is the case with utilitarianism and social contract, deontologists ask whether an action is consistent with a particular principle or rule. In Module 5, we studied the ethical deontological categorical imperative of Immanuel Kant. Kant does not believe the authority for duty-driven activity is God. Kant believes that human will is the highest authority. He believes this “highest authority" emanates from the use of human reason. In short, Perhaps Kant’s “duty” is not as absolute as one might suppose. Human ordained moral action is often subject to change according to personal preference.  For Kant, the...

Words: 391 - Pages: 2


...Thought-Piece 2 Relativism, Cultural and Moral People in different cultures, as well as people within a given culture, hold different moral views on particular issues. Some members of our society believe that abortion is immoral, and others believe that it is morally permissible. Thus, it is very important that we distinguish what is often called cultural and moral relativism. Differing views regarding the morality of a given action or practice may be the result of a number of factors. Two societies may basically and ultimately disagree on moral principles, but the disagreement may also be on many other levels. For instance, two societies may adhere to a basic principle: What helps the society flourish is moral and what hinders it is immoral. Differing conditions therefore provide a reason for holding different actions to be moral or immoral. A society’s factual beliefs also affect what it holds to be moral or immoral. Some societies believe what is false. To some extent, this is probably true of all societies. However, most societies are aware that they obtain more and more factual knowledge as they develop and progress in life. Just as a society may be mistaken about the proofs, so it may be mistaken about some of its moral judgements. The saying “When in Rome, do as the Romans do” has limited applicability. One clearly should observe local etiquette and other such customs in countries other than one’s own. So, when in Rome, one should indeed do as the......

Words: 448 - Pages: 2


...Relativism: A term underlined by consequence. Abstract Relativism argues that there are no absolute truths. It suggests that the concept of right and wrong in any given human behavior can only be determined by applying its relevance to the culture of the given subject. Culture “A” may believe in and practice female circumcision while culture “B” may unequivocally oppose it. In both cultures, there is a fundamental difference in what they believe to be the truth about this ritual. One person might view it as custom, or a rite, or a sacred practice. Another may view it as a brutal and primitive method of control. It all depends on where you are standing, so with regard to personal, cultural, and ethical beliefs, the only absolute truth is that there are no absolute truths. However, this does not discredit the notion of universal moral requirements. Absolute truths do exist. They exist because there are consequences to every action, and no matter what context, perception, or point of view one possesses, the concept of action versus consequence is a universal constant. Genocide kills many people. That is not a belief. If you commit genocide, it is absolutely true that people will die. It is a consequence. If we all desired the consequences of genocide then we would all be gone. Fortunately, most of us do not wish to commit genocide, but for those who do, they feel that they have a good enough reason to do so because there is a desired consequence of that......

Words: 870 - Pages: 4