# PTE SST #18: Moral Objectivism vs Moral...

Summarize Spoken Text #18 - Level 3 - Feeds Writing + Listening

> You will hear a short lecture. Write a summary on what you have just heard from the lecture in your own words.You have 10 minutes to finish this task. Your response will be judged on the Quality of Your writing and on how well your response presents the key points presented in the lecture.

## Answer

The speaker explains that moral objectivism proposes universal moral principles applicable to all. In contrast, moral absolutism asserts rigid boundaries between right and wrong, with no exceptions. While objectivism allows some flexibility, absolutism demands unyielding adherence. Therefore, both concepts aim to guide behavior, but differ significantly in how they interpret moral standards and decision-making.

## Explanation

The correct summary should accurately capture the speaker's distinction between moral objectivism, which posits universal moral principles applicable across contexts, and moral absolutism, which emphasizes rigid, non-negotiable moral boundaries that must be followed without exception.

## Hints

- Focus on the speaker's definition of moral objectivism as a set of universal guidelines for behavior.
- Note how the speaker contrasts this with moral absolutism, which involves fixed, non-negotiable rules that cannot be violated.

## Transcript

With the concept of moral objectivism, what we're looking at is the idea that there can be some universal moral principles: some rules, some ideas and guidelines that are valid for all people in all social environments and all situations. The idea that we can essentially have some signposts or a road map to guide behavior is going to be consistent across all individuals. Now if we take a look at this in another perspective, we can come up with a view of moral absolutism. In the area of moral absolutism, basically, what we have is illustrated on the right-hand side of this slide, is a very firm and unyielding boundary between what is right and what is wrong. And so, within moral absolutism, basically what you have are these non-overridable principles. They must be followed. They must never be violated and there were no exceptions. It is always right. It is always wrong. And nothing is subject to interpretation, and nothing is dependent upon the situation.

[Practise this question with the exam timer](https://testmigo.com/pte/practice/summarize-spoken-text/moral-objectivism-vs-moral-absolutism) - [All Summarize Spoken Text questions](https://testmigo.com/pte/practice/summarize-spoken-text)