Not sure if this thread has been already, so
Moral RelativismMoral absolutism is an ethical view that particular actions are absolutely right or wrong. Stealing, for instance, might be considered to be always immoral, even if done to promote some other good (e.g., stealing food to feed a starving family), and even if it does in the end promote such a good. Moral absolutism stands in contrast to other categories of normative ethical theories such as consequentialism, which holds that the morality (in the wide sense) of an act depends on the consequences or the context of the act.
Moral UniversalismMoral relativism may be any of several philosophical positions concerned with the differences in moral judgments across different people and cultures. Descriptive moral relativism holds only that some people do in fact disagree about what is moral; meta-ethical moral relativism holds that in such disagreements, nobody is objectively right or wrong; and normative moral relativism holds that because nobody is right or wrong, we ought to tolerate the behavior of others even when we disagree about the morality of it.
Which one do you follow and why? Discussion encouraged.Moral universalism (also called moral objectivism or universal morality) is the meta-ethical position that some system of ethics, or a universal ethic, applies universally, that is, for "all similarly situated individuals", regardless of culture, race, sex, religion, nationality, sexuality, or any other distinguishing feature.
Universalism holds merely that what is right or wrong is independent of custom or opinion (as opposed to moral relativism), but not necessarily that what is right or wrong is independent of context or consequences (as in absolutism). Moral universalism is compatible with moral absolutism, but also positions such as consequentialism.
I consider myself a mix of Moral Relativism and Moral Universalism because while I acknowledge that people can often disagree at times, especially when polarizing a conflict in taking sides, and that social pressure can dictate ethical norms that not everyone will agree with, I do believe there is an inherent nature to people that desires and thrives under a certain kind of ethics and that it's each person's responsibility as an intelligent being to find what that is and live a fulfilling life with those that share their ethics.