Moral Relativist vs. Absolutist Bernita M. Smith
MT-PH 364 Contemporary Culture & Worldview
Instructor Hoxie January 9, 2015

This week’s apply assignment ask that I write a 1-2 page paper comparing and contrasting my worldview with that of a moral relativist. Moral relativist can be defined as one who’s the direct opposite of an absolutist. They believe that concepts such as right and wrong, good and bad, or true and false can change based on ones culture and situation. I find this way of thinking very hard to understand because I feel we all should live by a standard that ultimately identifies you as a person who believe in doing things that are right, that follows the law and that pleases God. Unfortunately, moral relativist believe standards can be changed at any time. Moral relativist are also tolerant of matters with other cultures but are complacent in their own matters, which can lead to the absence of mortality in many cases. This belief put individuals in the position to figure out things for themselves based on what they believe is right rather than what is legally considered ethical. Moral relativist are not concerned with getting their moral principles right, as opposed to absolutist who has a huge concern with getting their moral principles right (Wilkens & Sanford, 2009). Absolutist, such as myself, adapt the concept that things must be done ethically, and that we must follow the law. The law of the land give us many of our ethical standards, when we follow these standards we promote values such as trust, good behavior, fairness and kindness. Ethical standards are defined as codes of conduct that are adopted as means of inspiring trust and a mutual sense of respect between two parties. However, the law of the land is not the only place where we can find our standards for living. In my opinion, as a Christian, the Bible gives us principles for living as well. We can say biblical principles are the law of love and the law of love means Christian are to love God, themselves and others because God loves them. “Truth”, according to Steven Wilkens & Mark Sanford,