Ethical Relativism Lecture Review

The Nature of Ethics: Ethical Relativism ## What is Ethical Relativism? Ethical relativism explores whether objective moral standards exist. It questions how we compare different moral opinions across individuals, cultures, or societies, and if there's any universal standard to determine what is right or wrong. ## Two Aspects of Relativism There are two main aspects to the discussion of relativism: 1. Descriptive Relativism: * This is a factual claim that describes how the world is. * It states that different cultures and individuals have different moral values and practices. * Examples: * Dietary Practices: Some cultures eat dogs or crickets, while others consider pigs or cows sacred. * Gender Roles: Some societies expect women to stay at home, while others support equal roles. * Legal/Social Norms: Interracial marriage was not allowed in the United States before, for instance, in 1816 (referring to the gradual change in laws even later). * Female Genital Mutilation (FGM)/Circumcision: In cultures where it's accepted, it's called 'circumcision'; in cultures where it's deemed unjust, it's labeled 'genital mutilation', carrying negative connotations. * Language and Gender: English primarily uses two gender pronouns (she/he), while some Native American languages have up to eight pronouns, reflecting different gender concepts. * Descriptive relativism simply notes these differences without making a judgment about their rightness or wrongness. 2. Normative Relativism (also called Metaethical Relativism): * This is an ethical claim about how the world ought to be and the nature of moral truth. * It argues that there are no objective moral truths, and all moral judgments are only relative to a specific society, culture, or individual. * It doesn't deny the existence of morals but asserts that there's no objective standard to judge one set of morals against another. ## Types of Normative Relativism ### A. Cultural Relativism (Conventionalism) * Definition: The claim that moral values and principles are valid only relative to a particular culture or society. What a society deems right is right for that society. * Implication: There is no objective moral standard outside a given culture by which to judge its practices. We can only judge individuals based on whether they follow their own society's rules. * Example: If Country A believes stealing is sometimes okay, and Country B believes it's never okay, then a person in Country A who steals under deemed acceptable circumstances is acting morally within their society, and a person from Country B cannot objectively judge them as immoral. ### B. Individual Relativism (Subjectivism) * Definition: The claim that moral values are valid only relative to an individual's own beliefs and values. What an individual thinks is right is right for them. * Implication: If I believe eating puppies is morally acceptable, then it is for me, and there is no objective or external standard to deem my action wrong. * Consequences: Morality becomes meaningless and useless for discussion or interpersonal judgment, as each person's internal compass is the sole arbiter of right and wrong. ## Cultural Relativism: Strong vs. Weak Versions * Strong Relativism: Asserts that there are absolutely no objective moral truths whatsoever. All morals are entirely culture-dependent. * Weak Relativism: Suggests that some objective truths or core values might exist (e.g., valuing life), but their expression or interpretation is relative to a society. This view is compatible with descriptive relativism. * Example: The