MORAL UNIVERSALISM

​Moral universalism is the metaethical position that some system of ethics or a universal ethic applies universally. As defined earlier, this is also called universal morality. That is, for all similarly situated individuals regardless of culture, race, sex, religion, nationality, sexual orientation, or any other distinguishing feature, ethical positions are universal. Moral universalism is opposed to moral nihilism (the belief that no moral truths exist) and moral relativism (the belief that morality depends on culture, context, or individual perspective). These are the other two positions we will cover in moral ontology.

​

However, not all forms of moral universalism are absolutist (holding that moral rules apply without exception), nor are they necessarily value modest (claiming only a limited set of values are universal). 

​

Many forms of universalism, such as utilitarianism (the ethical theory that actions are right if they maximize overall happiness), are non-absolutist (allowing flexibility depending on context), and some forms, such as that of Isaiah Berlin, may be value pluralist (holding that multiple, sometimes conflicting, values can be equally valid).

In addition to the theories of moral realism (the view that moral facts exist independently of human beliefs), moral universalism includes other cognitivist moral theories such as the ethical subjectivism and the divine command theory (both of which are covered in our moral semantics section), and also the non-cognitivist moral theory of universal prescriptivism (the idea that moral statements function like universal prescriptions, or commands).

​

According to R. W. Heburn, to move towards the objectivist pole (the belief that morality exists objectively, independent of human feelings) is to argue that moral judgments can be rationally defensible, true, or false, that there are rational procedural tests for identifying morally impermissible actions, or that moral values exist independently of the feeling states of individuals at particular times.

​

Linguist and political theorist Noam Chomsky states: "If we adopt the principle of universality, if an action is right for others, it is right for us. Those who do not rise to the minimal moral level of applying to themselves the standards they apply to others, more stringent ones, in fact, plainly cannot be taken seriously when they speak of appropriateness of response or of right and wrong, good and evil."

​

To expand further, let’s look at the history of moral universalism. The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights can be read as assuming a kind of moral universalism. The drafting committee of the Universal Declaration did assume, or at least aspired to, a universal approach to articulating international human rights. Although the declaration has undeniably come to be accepted throughout the world as a cornerstone of the international system for the protection of human rights, a belief among them that the Universal Declaration does not correctly reflect certain important worldviews has given rise to more than one supplementary declaration, such as the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam and the Bangkok Declaration.

​

Summary: moral universalism is the idea that some moral rules/values apply to everyone, no matter the context. While it can take different forms (some stricter, some more flexible), it still shares the belief that morality is not just a matter of opinion. As we saw, this thinking has shaped real-world events like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which aims to set a common standard for all people.