Moral Decisions

Many reasons support the argument that American society should combine both moral relativism and moral absolutism when making moral decisions.

Moral absolutism relies on generally accepted principles such as natural law when making decisions. The universal law determines whether the actions are right or wrong. Absolutism is a Christian viewpoint of recognizing actions. On the contrary, moral relativism does not rely on universal laws. The judgment of the actions is according to the situation, feelings, and culture. Therefore, an action can be right for one person while it is wrong for another person because of their differing cultural values (Benedict, 1934).

First, Americans are a diverse society that has different religious inclinations. The different religions have different beliefs and perceptions about moral values. For example, Hinduism, Christianity, Islamic, Gays, Lesbian, and Bisexuals all possess different standpoints about morality. Americans have evicted moral laws from the education system and legal system. Therefore, there are no justified moral laws to deal with the dynamic society. Indeed, moral absolutism would work well among the Christians and other citizens who subscribe to the theistic view of morality. On the other hand, the moral relativism would work well for non-religious groups who do not agree with the Biblical view of morality. It is difficult to micro-manage the Americans because most are educated and hold different views about life. Americans do not have one culture that can normalize the moral values of its people (Trinity International University, 2010).

Secondly, the history clearly indicates that moral relativism cannot solve the problems in America. It has shown the demise of empires and nations because of solving moral issues relatively. The historical world recession of the early 1930s is enough proof that applying moral relativism in solving business issues can lead to fall of American economy. Therefore, the America must apply moral absolute laws to fight issues like global recession, corporate bankruptcy, drug trafficking, and terrorism. It is evidently clear that America has started applying laws of moral absolutism by spending billions to fight the global terrorism, because it is agreeable that terrorism can make the world unsafe. Moreover, the history has shown that scholars who do not undergo a transformation of the Christianity beliefs are likely to make unsound decisions in both public office and corporate world because of relying on moral relativism. Solving such problems require Americans to apply absolutism teachings so that they can hold such public figures accountable for their wrong deeds (Gowans, 2004).

Lastly, Absolutism cannot guide the conduct of the Americans appropriately. The diversity of the American society requires all-around rules that can give direction about right and wrong doings. The modern American community has many issues like gays and lesbianism that have destroyed the moral fabric according to absolutism views. However, if America adopts the absolutism view, it would act against the constitutional right that guarantees the citizens the right to associate with a person of their choice. Therefore, containing the American society requires some relativism approach because absolutism view would misjudge other human beings. Absolute rules conflict in the end. Only a portion of the American society would agree to the absolute rules, especially those that are Biblical inherent. More so, American law allows Atheism. Therefore, imposing absolutism Christians laws would lead to conflicts with non-Christian citizens because they cannot agree with such rules (Irvine, 2000).

In conclusion, American society should adopt both moral relativism and absolutism. First, the American society is diverse. Secondly, moral relativism suffers inadequacy in solving the moral issues in America. Lastly, the absolutism laws do not appropriately guide the American society. Therefore, it is appropriate for America to adopt both moral views in decision making.