Present a case for Moral Absolutism or Moral Relativism (as a lawyer in a court

Question:a) Begin the case by asking the question: what necessitates moral absolutism or moral relativism.
b) Backup your claim.

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker: a) Begin the case by asking the question: what necessitates moral absolutism or moral relativism.
b) Backup your claim.

That's not how a lawyer in a court case argues. They (soon to be we) present an opening, which is an overview. Then they present evidence, chiefly in the form of witness testimony. Then they sum up the evidence and demonstrate the conclusions that can be drawn from it. You're looking for the way a debator would argue.

I've always found that most views of morality that seem to make sense can usually be counterred by referring to the example of Nazi Germany, when a whole society acted in an immoral fassion, first internally, then outwardly towards the rest of the world. That makes a good challenge to most moral relativist positions. However, absolutism is a major justification for such actions, which makes it an unattractive idea. Ultimately, I'm not sure there is any consistent notion of morality, just a loose and inconsistent concept. We can be morally relativist at one moment, but if someone else's relative ideas of morallity stray in certain ways, we become more absolutist. I don't really have a problem with that.

Do your own homework

.Beyond reasonable doubt!!! Based on factual evidence presented