What is the core philosophical concept described by moral relativism, and what is another term used for it?

Moral relativism, also frequently referred to as ethical relativism, is a philosophical stance that addresses the variations in moral judgments observed among different individuals and cultures. It explores the idea that morality is not absolute but rather depends on context.

What does the term 'relativist' signify in the context of moral philosophy?

In the context of moral philosophy, a 'relativist' is an individual who advocates for or adheres to the principles of moral relativism, suggesting that moral judgments are not universally true but are instead relative to specific cultural, societal, or individual perspectives.

What is the fundamental assertion of descriptive moral relativism?

Descriptive moral relativism asserts that people genuinely and fundamentally disagree about what is considered moral, without making any evaluative or normative judgments about the existence of these disagreements. It is essentially an observation of differing moral standards across groups.

How does meta-ethical moral relativism differ from descriptive moral relativism?

While descriptive moral relativism merely observes moral disagreements, meta-ethical moral relativism goes further by proposing that moral judgments inherently contain an indexical element. This means their truth value is dependent on the context of their use, implying that moral terms like 'good' or 'wrong' do not have universal truth conditions but are relative to specific traditions, beliefs, or practices.

What is the central tenet of normative moral relativism?

Normative moral relativism holds that individuals ought to tolerate the behavior of others, even when significant moral disagreements exist between them. This position suggests that tolerance is a moral imperative, particularly when there is no universally agreed-upon moral standard.

Can the three main variations of moral relativism (descriptive, meta-ethical, normative) be held independently?

Yes, the three variations—descriptive, meta-ethical, and normative moral relativism—are distinct positions and can be held independently of each other. For instance, one could observe that cultures have different moral standards (descriptive) without necessarily believing that all moral views are equally valid (meta-ethical) or that tolerance is always required (normative).

What was Richard Rorty's perspective on the term 'relativist'?

Richard Rorty viewed the term 'relativist' as having become a pejorative label. He argued that thinkers labeled as such typically only meant that the criteria for choosing between philosophical opinions are less rigid than previously assumed, rather than claiming all ideas are equally valid. Rorty expressed concern that this labeling contributed to philosophers becoming isolated from broader culture.

In what historical contexts has moral relativism been debated?

Moral relativism has been a subject of debate for thousands of years across various civilizations, with notable arguments originating in ancient Greece and historical India. Discussions on the topic continue to the present day and have also attracted attention in fields like art, religion, and science.

What ancient Greek philosophical ideas are associated with moral relativism?

In ancient Greece, the philosopher Protagoras (c. 481–420 BC) is known for the assertion that 'man is the measure of all things,' which implies a subjective or relative standard for truth and values. Additionally, the historian Herodotus (c. 484–420 BC) observed that each society considers its own customs and beliefs superior to others, reflecting a relativistic perspective on cultural practices.

How did Sextus Empiricus and other ancient Pyrrhonist philosophers engage with the concept of morality?

Sextus Empiricus and other ancient Pyrrhonist philosophers questioned the existence of objective morality. Their skeptical approach involved suspending judgment on the ultimate truth or falsity of moral claims, aligning with a relativistic or at least non-absolutist view of ethics.

What was Baruch Spinoza's stance on inherent good and evil?

Baruch Spinoza, in the early modern era, held the view that nothing is inherently good or evil. This perspective suggests that moral qualities are not intrinsic properties of actions or objects but are rather attributed based on human perception or convention.

What was David Hume's influence on modern ethical thought, particularly concerning relativism?

David Hume is considered influential in the development of both emotivism and moral relativism, though he did not fully espouse relativism himself. He distinguished between matters of fact and matters of value, suggesting moral judgments stem from sentiments and passions rather than verifiable facts, and he denied that morality had any objective standard, viewing the universe as indifferent to human preferences.

How did Friedrich Nietzsche view moral values and their construction?

Friedrich Nietzsche believed that moral values are relative to one's goals and self, emphasizing the need to critically assess the values we hold. He suggested that what is considered 'good' is often determined by those in power and that morality itself could pose a danger, advocating for the active construction of morals based on individual truths and values rather than passively accepting societal norms.

What criticism did Brian Leiter attribute to Nietzsche regarding moral values?

Brian Leiter, interpreting Nietzsche, suggested that Nietzsche's central argument for anti-realism about value was explanatory: moral facts do not feature in the 'best explanation' of experience and are therefore not real constituents of the objective world. In essence, moral values could be 'explained away'.

How did Nietzsche critique Platonic and Christian views on morality?

Nietzsche criticized Plato's emphasis on transcendent Forms and Christianity's promotion of life-denying moral qualities like humility and obedience. He saw these as prioritizing an otherworldly realm over the experienced world and believed they represented a form of transcendence that devalued earthly existence.

What caution did anthropologist Ruth Benedict offer regarding the study of cultures?

Ruth Benedict cautioned observers against ethnocentrism, which is the practice of evaluating subjects of study using the standards of one's own culture. She argued that transcendent morals do not exist, only socially constructed customs, and that anthropologists should remain neutral when comparing different cultural practices.

What did Edward Westermarck propose regarding the origin and nature of moral ideas?

Edward Westermarck, a proponent of moral relativism, proposed that all moral ideas are subjective judgments shaped by an individual's upbringing. He rejected ethical intuitionism, which posits that moral truths are known through innate intuition, citing the wide variations in beliefs across societies as evidence against such a universal faculty.

What is the 'scientific' argument for meta-ethical relativism?

The scientific argument for meta-ethical relativism draws from fields like evolutionary biology and cognitive psychology, suggesting that morality is a natural phenomenon shaped by evolutionary mechanisms. In this view, morality is defined as a set of relative social practices that promote the survival and successful reproduction of a species.

What literary concepts are mentioned in relation to moral relativism?

The text mentions literary perspectivism, which arises from different interpretations of myths, and the concept of polysemy in poems as taught by structuralism, as relating to moral relativism. Examples of literary works cited as relativistic include Gogol's 'Dead Souls' and Lawrence Durrell's 'The Alexandria Quartet'.

What is a primary philosophical criticism leveled against meta-ethical relativism by thinkers like R. M. Hare?

Philosophers like R. M. Hare argue that moral propositions, despite lacking factual content, are still subject to human logical rules, meaning contradictory ethical judgments cannot be simultaneously held. This allows for shared moral discourse with common standards, suggesting that relativism, in this logical sense, is flawed because human logic provides an objective basis for evaluating moral assertions.

How does Walter Terence Stace's position relate to moral absolutism and universalism?

Walter Terence Stace, in his work 'The Concept of Morals,' argued against moral absolutism but advocated for moral universalism. He believed that while absolute moral rules might not exist, there are still universal principles or standards that can guide ethical behavior.

What is the criticism of 'philosophical poverty' leveled against moral relativism?

Critics argue that moral relativism suffers from 'philosophical poverty' because it rejects fundamental premises necessary for moral discussions, such as the existence of right and wrong answers discoverable through reason. This can lead to an inability to arbitrate disagreements, potentially reducing moral discourse to mere preference or leading to incoherence, akin to moral nihilism.

According to critics like Ibn Warraq and Eddie Tabash, how does meta-ethical relativism affect participation in moral discussions?

Ibn Warraq and Eddie Tabash suggest that meta-ethical relativists effectively remove themselves from normative moral discussions by rejecting the premise that reason can discover right and wrong answers. They argue that relativists either refuse to engage in such discussions or deem all conflicting viewpoints as equally correct, limiting their ability to object to practices like murder or torture based on anything beyond personal preference.

What challenge does Simon Blackburn raise regarding moral relativism as a moral system?

Simon Blackburn criticizes moral relativism by stating that it fails as a moral system because it cannot effectively arbitrate disagreements. He implies that a functional moral system requires mechanisms for resolving conflicting ethical viewpoints, which relativism, by its nature, may lack.

What is another criticism concerning the identification of relevant groups in moral relativism?

A significant criticism is the difficulty in identifying which specific group's moral truths are authoritative for a moral relativist. Since individuals often belong to multiple groups (based on culture, religion, etc.) with potentially conflicting values, it becomes challenging to determine which group's morality applies or takes precedence.

How has Roman Catholicism responded to moral relativism?

Roman Catholic intellectuals attribute perceived post-war European decadence to the displacement of absolute values by moral relativism. They argue that Europeans abandoned traditional Christian norms for evolving relative moral rules, leading to societal changes like the separation of sexual activity from procreation and a decline in family importance. Pope John Paul II's encyclical 'Veritatis Splendor' is cited as a key response, addressing modern controversies like abortion.

What is Bhikkhu Bodhi's perspective on morality from a Buddhist viewpoint in relation to relativism?

Bhikkhu Bodhi, a Buddhist monk, expressed concern that a materialistic worldview, by assigning value to private subjectivity, undermines objective moral foundations, leading to moral degeneration. He argued that morality needs to be embedded in a spiritual system that grounds it in a transpersonal order, affirming that ethical values are intrinsic laws of the cosmos, not mere personal opinions.

How does moral relativism differ from ethical subjectivism?

Moral relativism is distinct from ethical subjectivism, although they are often held together. Ethical subjectivism posits that the truth of ethical claims depends on mind-independent factors, while moral relativism asserts that moral judgments are relative to individuals or groups. For example, one could be a subjectivist by believing morality is dictated by a deity (mind-dependent) but not a relativist if that deity's morality is considered universal.

Can moral relativism be compatible with moral realism?

Yes, moral relativism can be compatible with moral realism, depending on how the relativist position is constructed. Moral realism generally holds that moral statements have truth values and refer to robust moral facts. A relativist who believes that moral truths are tied to specific, observable facts (like laws of a country) could be considered a moral realist, as they accept the existence of objective, albeit context-dependent, moral facts.

What are the three theses typically associated with moral realism?

The three theses commonly associated with moral realism are: 1) the semantic thesis, stating that moral statements express propositions that can be true or false; 2) the alethic thesis, asserting that some moral propositions are indeed true; and 3) the metaphysical thesis, which posits that the metaphysical status of moral facts is robust and comparable to other ordinary facts about the world.

What is the relationship between moral relativism and moral anti-realism?

Depending on its formulation, moral relativism may or may not be independent of moral anti-realism. Many moral relativists deny one or more of the core theses of moral realism, thus aligning with anti-realism. However, a relativist position that accepts the truth-aptness and objective existence of context-dependent moral facts (like legal statutes) could still be considered a form of moral realism.

What historical figures from ancient Greece are associated with ideas related to moral relativism?

Ancient Greek figures associated with ideas related to moral relativism include Protagoras, known for his statement 'man is the measure of all things,' and Herodotus, who observed cultural differences in customs and beliefs. Sextus Empiricus and other Pyrrhonist philosophers also contributed by questioning the existence of objective morality.

What role did the Jaina principle of Anekantavada play in early discussions of relativism?

The Jaina principle of Anekantavada, attributed to Mahavira, states that truth and reality are perceived differently from diverse viewpoints, and no single perspective holds the complete truth. This concept aligns with relativistic thinking by acknowledging the multiplicity of valid perspectives on reality and truth.

How did Enlightenment philosopher David Hume distinguish between moral judgments and facts?

David Hume distinguished between matters of fact and matters of value. He proposed that moral judgments are not based on verifiable facts but rather on human sentiments and passions. This separation laid groundwork for later relativistic ideas by suggesting morality is subjective rather than objective.

What did William Graham Sumner advocate regarding moral standards in his work 'Folkways'?

William Graham Sumner, an influential advocate of meta-ethical relativism, argued in 'Folkways' that societal perceptions of right and wrong are entirely shaped by the traditions, customs, and practices of a culture. He contended that no higher moral standard exists beyond local cultural morals, making trans-cultural judgments about a culture's ethics unjustifiable.

What is the core idea behind 'universal prescriptivism' as a counterpoint to relativism?

Universal prescriptivism, associated with thinkers like R. M. Hare, posits that moral propositions, while not necessarily factual, are subject to logical rules and universalizability. This means that moral judgments should be applicable to all similar situations, providing a basis for shared moral discourse and objective evaluation, thereby challenging relativistic claims.

What is the 'is-ought problem' mentioned in relation to David Hume?

The 'is-ought problem,' articulated by David Hume, refers to the philosophical challenge of deriving prescriptive statements ('ought') from descriptive statements ('is'). This is relevant to moral relativism as it questions how one can logically move from observing what is the case (e.g., cultural practices) to prescribing what ought to be done.

What is the significance of 'cultural relativism' in relation to moral relativism, as discussed by Ruth Benedict?

Ruth Benedict's work on cultural relativism highlights that moral norms are socially constructed and vary across cultures. This perspective supports moral relativism by suggesting that there are no universal moral truths, only culturally specific customs, and that judging one culture's morals by another's standards is inappropriate.

What did the Catholic Church and intellectuals like Pope Benedict XVI and Marcello Pera attribute to moral relativism in post-war Europe?

These figures attributed the perceived decadence and societal changes in post-war Europe to the rise of moral relativism. They argued that the abandonment of traditional Christian norms in favor of evolving relative moral rules led to significant shifts, such as the decoupling of sexual activity from procreation and a decline in the importance of family structures.

What is the main point of contention between moral relativists and moral universalists regarding disagreement?

Moral universalists argue that even when well-intentioned individuals disagree on moral issues, there remains a meaningful sense in which one action can be more morally preferable than another. They believe objective standards of evaluation exist, which contrasts with moral relativism's view that moral judgments are inherently context-dependent and lack universal applicability.

How does the concept of 'ethnocentricism' relate to the criticisms of moral relativism?

Ethnocentricism, the practice of judging other cultures by the standards of one's own, is often seen as a counterpoint to the relativistic approach advocated by anthropologists like Ruth Benedict. While relativism encourages understanding cultures on their own terms, ethnocentrism can lead to imposing one's own moral framework, which critics of relativism might argue is necessary for certain moral judgments.

Moral Relativism Wiki: Ethical Landscapes: Charting Moral Relativism

Dive in with Flashcard Learning!

When you are ready...
🎮 Play the Wiki2Web Clarity Challenge Game🎮

Core Concepts

Defining Moral Relativism

Moral relativism, or ethical relativism, encompasses philosophical positions concerning the differences in moral judgments across peoples and cultures. An advocate is often termed a relativist. It posits that moral standards are not absolute but are relative to specific cultural, societal, or individual contexts.

Descriptive vs. Meta-ethical vs. Normative

Descriptive moral relativism observes fundamental disagreements in moral standards across cultures. Meta-ethical moral relativism asserts that moral judgments' truth-values are context-dependent (e.g., relative to a culture or individual). Normative moral relativism suggests that tolerance of differing moral behaviors is a moral imperative.

The Nuance of Labels

Philosophers like Richard Rorty noted that the label "relativist" can be a pejorative. Proponents often argue not that all ideas are equally valid, but that the grounds for choosing between philosophical opinions are less algorithmic than traditionally assumed, suggesting a need for greater cultural context in philosophical discourse.

Variations of Relativism

Descriptive Relativism

This position simply observes that significant moral disagreements exist between different cultures and individuals, even when considering the same facts. It is a statement of fact about moral diversity, without necessarily endorsing any particular stance on the truth or validity of these differing moralities.

Meta-ethical Relativism

This view contends that moral terms like "good" or "wrong" lack universal truth conditions. Their truth-value is contingent upon the specific cultural traditions, individual convictions, or societal practices. William Graham Sumner, for instance, argued that local customs entirely shape moral understanding, precluding cross-cultural moral judgments.

Meta-ethical relativists are descriptive relativists but go further by denying objective standards for moral evaluation. They argue that any appeal to a standard is inherently personal or societal. This contrasts with moral universalism, which posits the existence of objective moral standards discoverable through reason.

Normative Relativism

Building on meta-ethical relativism, this stance argues that because moral truths are relative, we ought to tolerate the behaviors of others, even when they conflict with our own moral standards. However, critics question deriving an "ought" from relativistic premises, and some argue that a degree of intolerance is necessary for progress.

Historical Roots

Ancient Origins

Ideas akin to moral relativism have ancient roots. The Jaina principle of Anekantavada and Protagoras's assertion that "man is the measure of all things" reflect early considerations of diverse perspectives. Historian Herodotus observed societies viewing their own customs as superior.

Enlightenment and Beyond

David Hume, while not a relativist himself, distinguished between facts and values, suggesting morality relates to sentiments. Friedrich Nietzsche critically examined the relativity of values, advocating for self-constructed moralities rather than imposed laws. Edward Westermarck later formulated a detailed theory, linking morality to upbringing and cultural customs.

Protagoras (c. 481–420 BC): "Man is the measure of all things."
Herodotus (c. 484–420 BC): Noted cultural ethnocentrism.
Sextus Empiricus: Denied objective morality.
Baruch Spinoza (1632–1677): Argued nothing is inherently good or evil.
David Hume (1711–1776): Distinguished facts from values; morality based on sentiment.
Friedrich Nietzsche (1844–1900): Critiqued inherited values, advocated for self-creation of morals.
Edward Westermarck (1862–1939): Linked morality to upbringing and cultural traditions.

Anthropological Influence

Anthropologists like Ruth Benedict cautioned against ethnocentrism, emphasizing that cultural customs should be understood within their context. This perspective, alongside growing knowledge of diverse societal beliefs, fueled philosophical questioning about the existence of objective, absolute moral standards.

Arguments for Relativism

Evolutionary Basis

Research in evolutionary biology and psychology suggests morality may be a natural phenomenon shaped by evolution. Social practices that promote species survival and reproduction could be defined as moral, implying a biological and thus relative foundation for ethical systems.

Literary Perspectivism

Literary analysis, particularly of myths and poetry, reveals how different interpretations and symbolic meanings can arise from varied cultural and structural contexts. This "literary perspectivism" highlights how narratives and their moral implications can be relative to the reader's framework.

Religious Perspectives

Some religious traditions, like Catholicism, have critiqued moral relativism, viewing it as a source of societal decline by displacing absolute values. Conversely, some interpretations within Buddhism emphasize the subjective nature of values and the need for morality to be grounded in a spiritual system that reflects inherent cosmic laws.

Criticisms of Relativism

Philosophical Poverty

Critics argue that meta-ethical relativism undermines moral discourse by rejecting the premise of reasoned moral truths. It can lead to "philosophical poverty," where disagreements cannot be arbitrated, potentially equating to moral nihilism or incoherence, as it may only allow appeals to preference.

The Problem of Group Identity

A significant challenge for relativism is identifying the relevant group to which moral truths are relative. Since individuals belong to multiple overlapping groups (cultural, religious, national), conflicting norms can arise, making it difficult to determine which moral framework takes precedence.

Universalist Counterarguments

Moral universalists contend that their systems often justify tolerance and that disagreement does not preclude meaningful discussion or the possibility of morally preferable actions. They argue that concepts like "good" or "bad" have evaluative meanings that transcend cultural specifics, allowing for shared understanding.

Distinguishing Relativism

Relativism vs. Subjectivism

Moral relativism is distinct from ethical subjectivism. While subjectivism holds that moral truths depend on mental states (like personal approval), relativism ties moral truth to specific contexts (like cultures or individuals). One can be a subjectivist without being a relativist, and vice versa.

Relativism vs. Anti-Realism

Moral relativism is not necessarily synonymous with moral anti-realism. While some relativist positions deny objective moral facts (making them anti-realist), others might accept moral facts but argue they are context-dependent, thus potentially aligning with a form of moral realism.

Teacher's Corner

Edit and Print this course in the Wiki2Web Teacher Studio

Edit and Print Materials from this study in the wiki2web studio

Click here to open the "Moral Relativism" Wiki2Web Studio curriculum kit

Use the free Wiki2web Studio to generate printable flashcards, worksheets, exams, and export your materials as a web page or an interactive game.

True or False?

Test Your Knowledge!

Gamer's Corner

Are you ready for the Wiki2Web Clarity Challenge?

Learn about moral_relativism while playing the wiki2web Clarity Challenge game.

Unlock the mystery image and prove your knowledge by earning trophies. This simple game is addictively fun and is a great way to learn!

Play now

Explore More Topics

Discover other topics to study!

chavacano

anglo-saxons

western neo-aramaic

bishop latter day saints

alternative rock

no religious test clause

utah state aggies football

seán clárach mac domhnaill

state university of new york at plattsburgh

shoshone

References

at the end of his review at http://jetpress.org/v21/blackford3.htm

Sextus Empiricus Outlines of Pyrrhonism Book III, Chapter 21

A full list of references for this article are available at the Moral relativism Wikipedia page

Feedback & Support

To report an issue with this page, or to find out ways to support the mission, please click here.

Disclaimer

Important Notice

This page was generated by an Artificial Intelligence and is intended for informational and educational purposes only. The content is based on a snapshot of publicly available data from Wikipedia and may not be entirely accurate, complete, or up-to-date.

This is not professional philosophical advice. The information provided on this website is not a substitute for rigorous academic study or consultation with qualified ethicists or philosophers. Always refer to primary sources and scholarly analysis for a comprehensive understanding of complex philosophical concepts.

The creators of this page are not responsible for any errors or omissions, or for any actions taken based on the information provided herein.

Ethical Landscapes

💡 Dive in with Flashcard Learning! 💡

Core Concepts ⚖️

🤔 Defining Moral Relativism

🔬 Descriptive vs. Meta-ethical vs. Normative

🗣️ The Nuance of Labels

Variations of Relativism ↔️

📊 Descriptive Relativism

❓ Meta-ethical Relativism

👍 Normative Relativism

Historical Roots 📜

🏛️ Ancient Origins

💡 Enlightenment and Beyond

🌍 Anthropological Influence

Arguments for Relativism 📈

🌱 Evolutionary Basis

🎭 Literary Perspectivism

📜 Religious Perspectives

Criticisms of Relativism ⚠️

🚫 Philosophical Poverty

🧩 The Problem of Group Identity

⚖️ Universalist Counterarguments

Distinguishing Relativism ❓

🤝 Relativism vs. Subjectivism

💡 Relativism vs. Anti-Realism

Teacher's Corner 🧑‍🏫

Edit and Print this course in the Wiki2Web Teacher Studio

True or False? 🤔

❓ Test Your Knowledge! ❓

Gamer's Corner 🎮

Are you ready for the Wiki2Web Clarity Challenge?

Explore More Topics

📜 Discover other topics to study!

References

📜 References

Feedback & Support 👍

To report an issue with this page, or to find out ways to support the mission, please click here.

Disclaimer ⚠️

📜 Important Notice

Dive in with Flashcard Learning!

Core Concepts

Defining Moral Relativism

Descriptive vs. Meta-ethical vs. Normative

The Nuance of Labels

Variations of Relativism

Descriptive Relativism

Meta-ethical Relativism

Normative Relativism

Historical Roots

Ancient Origins

Enlightenment and Beyond

Anthropological Influence

Arguments for Relativism

Evolutionary Basis

Literary Perspectivism

Religious Perspectives

Criticisms of Relativism

Philosophical Poverty

The Problem of Group Identity

Universalist Counterarguments

Distinguishing Relativism

Relativism vs. Subjectivism

Relativism vs. Anti-Realism

Teacher's Corner

True or False?

Test Your Knowledge!

Gamer's Corner

Discover other topics to study!

References

Feedback & Support

Disclaimer

Important Notice