Absolutism, Ethical

Ethical absolutism is the belief that all individuals are held to a particular moral standard. This view establishes that certain actions are always correct while others are always wrong. No matter where in the world absolutists may be, they are responsible to treat others according to the same moral standard established by their beliefs. Those who adhere to ethical absolutism insist that a distinction can be made between what is thought to be right and what is truly correct, and they believe that all people are held to these standards whether or not they are aware of their existence. The prescriptive nature of ethical absolutism allows for the acceptance of fundamental ethical principles without any qualifications with regard to place or time. This view provides a contrast to ethical relativism, which asserts that something is morally relative to a particular situation or standpoint.

Deontological viewpoints complement ethical absolutism well in that they provide guidelines for what exactly the moral standards are that should be upheld. For example, the Kantian would assert that lying is wrong in any situation because it violates the categorical imperative (i.e., lying cannot be willed a universal law). Although utilitarianism, unlike deontology, clearly has no absolutist starting point, utilitarian theorizing can result in absolutist prescriptions, such as Peter Singer's defense of animal rights.

Ethical absolutism is sometimes historically linked to traditions based on Divine Command such as Judeo-Christian practice and the Ten Commandments or the five pillars of Islam as well as other religious doctrines that provide distinct prescriptions for action. However, individuals may view their particular religious viewpoint as the basis for an absolutist belief system. Due to the variety of possible foundations for an absolutist standpoint, the outlook frequently faces fire from its critics. When absolutist beliefs, such as radical fundamentalist movements, are taken out of their religious context, they often do not stand up to rational criticism.

An absolute moral standard has never been proven, but recent attempts have been made to empirically demonstrate the existence of these unconditional rules. These principles, sometimes referred to as hypernorms, stem from integrative social contracts theory (ISCT). ISCT provides an account of the moral appropriateness of business practices through the formulation of fair agreements based on both micro and macro principles. As hypernorms represent the convergence of political, religious, and philosophical viewpoints, further empirical exploration of hypernorms may demonstrate the existence of global absolutist ethical beliefs.