Cultural Relativism, Divine Command Theory, And Ethical Egoism

The basic Principles that has been covered in ethics of computer games is Cultural Relativism, Subjectivism in Ethics, Divine Command Theory, Natural Law Theory, and Ethical Egoism. These arguments do not meet the minimum conception of morality which is Reason and impartiality. For all these arguments to be solid they also need to have reason and logic supporting it. All these arguments which are now mostly unfollowed because of the evident flaws they pertain are as follows. Starting off with cultural relativism as professor Buscani states, Different cultures have different conceptions of right and wrong. Also, Rachels from the elements of moral philosophy uses that “different cultures have different moral codes” (17). It is understood by
This theory has the argument that the nature of right and wrong is known as the divine command theory, which is god’s law and must be followed as Buscani Stated. This principle also does not meet the minimum conception of morality because of its reason and lack of impartiality. the problems present are as follow. From Rachels book “morality is mysterious” (38,39). God is able to, as the book used, turn child abuse into right because of his command. This logic does not fit that argument. Also “god’s commands arbitrary” (Rachels, 53). As the text used just because god said as a command can conflict with many. “he could have easily commanded us to be liars” (Rachels, 53) instead of telling truth. Lastly the command divine theory gives people wrong reasons to follow moral principles. An example as the text used about child abuse, this would be don’t hit children because god said so instead of the actual psychological and physical harm done to child (54). These problems all present are logically a problem and fail to have solid reason and
From Rachels text, natural law is described by having a particular view of world and its purposes (55). Also, presents how things are and also ought to be in world (56). Lastly concerns the moral knowledge of telling right and wrong (57). These main concepts are what make natural law theory different from command divine theory. This theory again does not meet the minimum conception of morality for its reason. Natural law lacks solid reason and logic behind it which makes it flawed. Some of the flaws are seen with its first key concept sometimes what’s natural is also bad. Examples would be human tendency for naturally caring for self, more than others or disease (57). Another flaw is presented is and ought to be statement of things should be. This is logically conflict for the simple reason that they are two different notions. Lastly this principle is conflicts with science and modern world views (58). Instead of the notion that things just happen where today science can prove many cases such as