Relative Absolutist or an Absolute Relativist?

The Westgate terrorist attack left the world reeling. The death of innocents: children and civilians who just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. One can’t help but feel in certain instances that maybe morality really isn’t relative- surely we cannot argue that this behavior is defensible and ‘one man's terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter’. There has to be a way in which we can talk about this as being ‘wrong’, in a way that is stronger than just expressing our own culturally relative opinion.

I have heard arguments by Sam Harris suggesting that we ought to view morality in more of a scientific way. He argues that we should consider morality being more of a mathematical process in which there is one correct answer. Although his arguments seem initially persuasive, it still doesn’t sit easily for me – especially as a product of the western free world, a culture which values the choices and opinions of the individual highly. 

The most persuasive argument I have heard regarding absolute morality is that of Paul Boghossian. He suggests if we argue that everyone is entitled to an opinion, and each person's opinion is as valid as the next, then morality moves entirely into the realm of normative, descriptive ethics. The ‘is ought gap’ is too large and there is no way of disapproving of anything strongly. All we are doing is simply expressing that we do not like that particular version of the ‘truth’, without really being about to provide any further reason as to why our version of ‘truth’ is any more valid.

Boghossian argues if we believe in absolute morality then we can, at the very least, disapprove of things that we can claim are abhorrent – for example one cannot ever argue the rightness of child pornography is dependent on one's viewpoint, yet relative morality potentially allows room for this. By declaring it to be absolutely wrong then one is going further than stating that it is wrong in this situation or that culture. There is a clearer intention of moral obligation.

This link explains more of Paul Boghossian’s argument .

However, although I find these arguments convincing the notion of absolute morality still sits uneasily with me. I am not one that likes to sit on the fence, but perhaps for now I will remain a relative absolutist… rather than an absolute relativist.
 

Image: Slaughter in winter by Breughel depicts a masscare of the innocents © Peter Baron