Philosophy
Stace is of the notion of ethical absolution as opposed to ethical relativism. Ethical absolution claims that there is indeed a universal moral code to which every human being is obliged either knowingly or unknowingly. Ethical relativism however is of the contrary opinion. Ethical relativism is of the notion that morality is relative. People coming from different cultures and backgrounds have their own definition of what is considered morally upright and what is frowned upon by ethical eyes.it is therefore impractical for one person to judge the other on grounds of their moral standing since there is no universally acceptable moral Stance. Stace however disagrees with this assertion.in an example aimed at discrediting ethical relativism he writes that various people have their own ideas as to the shape of the earth. This fact however does not affect the universal fact that the earth indeed has a single solitary shape irrespective of the beliefs of people on the matter that was at a certain point in human history a very hot topic of discussion.
Stace is right in his assertion that there is indeed a universal moral code to which all human beings are subject. This explains the fact that very different people from very diverse and different cultures may share certain moral ideals without ever interacting with each other. A good example is the case of murder. Almost all cultures in the world were able to decide independently and without any deliberation whatsoever that murder is unethical and completely unacceptable. This fact alludes to the existence of a universal moral code that applies to all human beings either consciously or subconsciously.
Individuals from different cultures may have their own personal definition of morality and ethics but dissection and analysis of these morals and ethics leads to the discovery of a universal ethical code. Stace is therefore right in his assertions.
