Moral relativism

Moral relativism or ethical relativism (often reformulated as relativist ethics or relativist morality) is used to describe several philosophical positions concerned with the differences in moral judgments across different peoples and cultures. An advocate of such ideas is often referred to as a relativist.

Descriptive moral relativism holds that people do, in fact, disagree fundamentally about what is moral, without passing any evaluative or normative judgments about this disagreement. Meta-ethical moral relativism holds that moral judgments contain an (implicit or explicit) indexical such that, to the extent they are truth-apt, their truth-value changes with context of use.[1][2] Normative moral relativism holds that everyone ought to tolerate the behavior of others even when large disagreements about morality exist.[3] Though often intertwined, these are distinct positions. Each can be held independently of the others.[4]

American philosopher Richard Rorty in particular has argued that the label of being a "relativist" has become warped and turned into a sort of pejorative. He has written specifically that thinkers labeled as such usually simply believe "that the grounds for choosing between such [philosophical] opinions is less algorithmic than had been thought", not that every single conceptual idea is as valid as any other. In this spirit, Rorty has lamented that "philosophers have... become increasingly isolated from the rest of culture."[5]

Moral relativism has been debated for thousands of years across a variety of contexts during the history of civilization. Arguments of particular notability have been made in areas such as ancient Greece[6] and historical India while discussions have continued to the present day. Besides the material created by philosophers, the concept has additionally attracted attention in diverse fields including art, religion, and science.[citation needed]

  1. ^ Joyce, Richard (2020), "Moral Anti-Realism (Supplement on Moral Objectivity and Moral Relativism)", in Zalta, Edward N. (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2020 ed.), Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, retrieved 2024-10-17, Relativism holds that moral claims contain an essential indexical element, such that the truth of any such claim requires relativization to some individual or group. According to such a view, it is possible that when John asserts "Stealing is wrong" he is saying something true, but that when Jenny asserts "Stealing is wrong" she is saying something false.)
  2. ^ Gowans, Chris (2021), "Moral Relativism", in Zalta, Edward N. (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2021 ed.), Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, retrieved 2024-10-17
  3. ^ "Moral Relativism | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy". www.iep.utm.edu. Retrieved 2020-05-27.
  4. ^ Gowans, Chris (2021). Zalta, Edward N. (ed.). "Moral Relativism". The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2021 ed.). Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. ... However, in moral philosophy 'relativism' is usually taken to suggest an empirical, a metaethical, or a normative position.
  5. ^ Rorty, Richard (1982). Consequences of Pragmatism. University of Minnesota Press. pp. 166–169. ISBN 0816610649.
  6. ^ Wolfe, Kyle. "The Ancient Greek Civilization". Bartleby.com.