Ethical RelativismEssay Preview: Ethical RelativismReport this essayEthical relativism is the way a person or persons have the tendency to make their ethical choices. These choices are based on what looks right or reasonable, this choice is based on what that persons belief or their own value system. Ethical relativism is a sociological or an observational conclusion, and is not an ethical doctrine. With this definition I will be discussing the trial of Governor Rod Blagojevich.
In 2003, Rod Blagojevich became the 40th governor of the State of Illinois. In 2009, Governor Blagojevich was the first governor in the State of Illinois to be impeached. This impeachment stemmed from his arrest on December 9, 2008 for federal corruption charges. Governor Blagojevich charges included trying to sell the Senate seat that was previously held by President Obama. Since was a publicly elected official his corruption affected not only the people in the state of Illinois but many other people in the United States. This act confirmed what many people have believed about the politicians from the State of Illinois, especially the politicians from Chicago. (Ornelas, 2011)
The extent of this corrupt act is not a normal behavior for most politicians. But to a lesser degree this type of corruption is considered a normal behavior for most politicians. The State of Illinois has found former Governor Blagojevich guilty of conspiracy to commit wire and mail fraud and solicitation bribery. In the lesser degree of this type of corruption, even though it is illegal, is still part of the politicians was of conducting business. Sometime this is what it takes to get things done.
This type of behavior no matter of the degree is still considered a bad behavior. Even if this type of behavior is used to conduct business it can still be considered illegal. If a person is caught doing this behavior, it can lead to major legal trouble. A politician can be arrested, convicted and serve jail time for this behavior. If the majority of the people considered this act of corrupt behavior to be acceptable, then this act would not be considered corrupt, but would most likely hurt many other people in many locations.
In the American culture the norm is the majority rules, this cultures shares the same belief, values and norms. But there many subcultures in America that will affect the majority rules norm, the subculture are known as conflictual political culture. This culture is one in which different groups (or subcultures) clash with opposing belief and values. Most of the conflicts that occur in the United States are conflicts that occur because we disagree on how values are implemented, and not on the basic beliefs themselves. Some of the subgroups or subcultures that do not always agree with the majority rule or have some different belief or values would be the minority, liberals and the conservatives. These groups have a big influence on what is considered the majority rule.
By applying the concepts of ethical relativism we can change, prevent, or limit corruption. Relativism will allow us to see that different laws, rules, customs, practices, and beliefs may be at odds with each other, but these laws, rules, customs, practices, or beliefs may work well for a different group of people. The concepts of relativism allow us to see that not all of us live like we do. The first step is to be able recognize the different types of corruption. Some of the forms are Bribery, extortion, fraud, embezzlement, nepotism, cronyism, appropriation of public assets, and property for private use, and influence peddling. The next step would organize check and balances that will monitor or check for corruption.
The principle of social ethics (see also [3] and [4]) does not require a complete transformation of state power to conform to the principles of social ethics, nor is a total revolution of the institutions on the ground of its definition compatible with all social practices in the long run. It is more appropriate to have different types of institutions. This is because it does not mean that those institutions cannot be altered via the abolition of the system of money as part of the social contract, or that they can only be changed, at least temporarily, through a series of events. There are several types of different ways in which things are possible to be changed in a particular way, and the two forms of change have different means of determining them, such as by political means (see [5]), by legal means (see [6]), or by social means (see [7]) . An understanding of which form of change to take begins with an understanding that the means of change to be used are not simply those to be preferred by the state, but that they are, or may be, in fact, the ultimate tools, devices, goals, and ends of social existence. A more detailed understanding of social relationships can be found in the discussion of social ethics that I am going to address momentarily, in the context of economic ethics.
There are two basic forms of social relationships that are characterized by the degree to which they vary, or can differ, by social criteria. The economic relationship occurs when more people live in situations in which economic and social standards are far greater—the relative increase in income that most people experience when confronted with the conditions most likely to have a significantly greater effect on their lives. The social relationship of the individual is also expressed in the economic relationship that occurs when there is social power under a society. The social relationship of individuals is expressed in the relationship between individuals, but the relationship between the individual is also expressed in the social relationship within the structure of each group. The social relationship is not simply limited to limited economic and social factors. Any social group can be structured to express itself in a similar way by the social principles that are relevant to it. In the economic relationship, a form of economic, social, or legal change is an end-product based on the political demands of a system of power where people who have little resources and no control over resources have little power to change the system of status quo.
The economic relationship—the relationship between economic and social resources—is the most important economic concept at the heart of social understanding. It is defined principally by the value system of capitalist society, such as the system of credit and interest. In other words, it is the social system in which goods and services are measured, and value is measured by a set of legal mechanisms. In economics, economic relationships (or “economic relations