Moral Relativism - Explained and Debated

Summary

This video delves into moral relativism, the idea that morality is not absolute but varies by culture and time. It contrasts with moral objectivism, which asserts universal moral truths. The discussion explores the theory's origins, including descriptive and cultural relativism, and meta-ethical relativism, which denies universal moral truths. The video examines moral relativism's strengths, such as explaining moral disagreements and promoting cultural tolerance, as well as its challenges, like the presupposition of objective morality and the issue of moral disagreements within cultures. It concludes by suggesting a blend of moral objectivism and relativism, where fundamental truths like the promotion of life exist, but moral behaviors can be relative.

Takeaways

• 🧐 Moral relativism is a broad ethical theory that claims there are no absolute or universal moral truths; morality is relative to specific cultures, societies, or time periods.
• 🌍 Descriptive relativism highlights the empirical reality that there are major disagreements about morality between different cultures and across different periods of time.
• 🎭 Cultural relativism argues that moral beliefs and practices are shaped entirely by the culture one is raised in, making all morality culturally dependent.
• ⏳ Practices such as infanticide, slavery, and child marriage, which were once acceptable, are now considered immoral, showcasing the relative nature of morality across time.
• 📜 Meta-ethical relativism takes it further by suggesting that there are no universal moral truths, and we have no grounds to claim that one culture's moral principles are better than another's.
• 🤔 One of the strengths of moral relativism is that it explains why there are so many moral disagreements across the world, making the idea of an objective moral truth seem implausible.
• 🗣️ Moral relativism encourages cultural tolerance by removing the lens of right or wrong and seeing cultures as merely different, fostering greater understanding and respect.
• ❓ One challenge to moral relativism is the claim that even if there are objective moral truths, we may not have discovered them yet, much like scientific truths that were eventually found.
• 🔍 Despite moral differences between cultures, there are also significant moral similarities, like opposition to murder and theft, which can be seen as evidence supporting moral objectivism.
• 💬 The debate over moral relativism versus moral objectivism could lead to a middle ground, where fundamental moral truths exist (like the promotion of life and happiness), but how they are practiced is relative to culture and context.

Q & A

What is the fundamental principle of moral relativism?

The fundamental principle of moral relativism is that there is no absolute, universal, or objective morality. Morality is relative to a particular standpoint, society, or time period.

How does moral relativism differ from moral objectivism?

Moral relativism claims that the truth of moral judgments is relative to specific cultures, societies, or time periods, whereas moral objectivism asserts that there are objective moral truths that apply universally.

What is descriptive relativism?

Descriptive relativism is the empirical awareness that there are fierce disagreements in morality across different cultures and time periods, highlighting that moral judgments vary widely.

How does cultural relativism relate to descriptive relativism?

Cultural relativism builds on descriptive relativism by emphasizing that culture is the defining factor of moral judgments. It asserts that all ethical beliefs and practices are rooted in the culture one is brought up in.

Can you give examples of moral practices that vary between cultures?

Examples include monogamy versus polygamy, views on contraception, and practices like infanticide, slavery, and child marriages, which were once accepted in some cultures but are now considered immoral.

What is meta-ethical relativism?

Meta-ethical relativism argues that because of descriptive and cultural relativism, there are no absolute or universal moral truths. Moral judgments are solely dependent on the culture and society they originate from.

What are some strengths of moral relativism?

Strengths include its ability to explain the existence of moral disagreements and cultural diversity, and it promotes cultural tolerance by encouraging the view that no culture's practices are inherently better or worse than another's.

What are some criticisms of moral relativism?

Criticisms include the idea that just because there are disagreements doesn't mean there are no objective truths, the exaggeration of cultural differences in morality, and the problematic implication that blatant immoral acts might be considered acceptable in some cultures.

How does moral relativism address disagreements within a culture?

Moral relativism acknowledges that there can be significant moral diversity within a culture and suggests that ethical subjectivism, where moral judgments are relative to individual attitudes, can further refine the theory.

Is there a potential middle ground between moral objectivism and moral relativism?

Yes, a possible middle ground is to accept that there are fundamental objective moral truths, such as promoting life, freedom, and happiness, while acknowledging that the behaviors and practices to achieve these truths can be relative to cultures and individuals.