Search results
Of the various views that have been called ‘moral relativism’, we can distinguish three plausible versions, which, for the purposes of this essay, I will label ‘normative moral relativism’, ‘moral judgement relativism’, and ‘meta‐ethical relativism’. Normative moral relativism asserts that different people, as agents, can be ...
Meta-ethical. Meta-ethical moral relativists believe not only that people disagree about moral issues, but that terms such as "good", "bad", "right" and "wrong" do not stand subject to universal truth conditions at all; rather, they are relative to the traditions, convictions, or practices of an individual or a group of people.
People also ask
What is metaethical relativism?
What is the difference between descriptive relativism and metaethical relativism?
Does metaethical relativism deny moral facts?
Does moral realism entail a rejection of metaethical relativism?
1 This is different for meta-ethical relativism: meta-ethical relativism is most often presented or defended in its extreme form, namely that all moral statements are relatively right or wrong if meta-ethical relativism is correct. For a discussion of this view, see Sinnott-Armstrong 2009. Varying versions of moral relativism 97 123
Feb 19, 2004 · Moral relativism is an important topic in metaethics. It is also widely discussed outside philosophy (for example, by political and religious leaders), and it is controversial among philosophers and nonphilosophers alike. This is perhaps not surprising in view of recent evidence that people’s intuitions about moral relativism vary widely.
Often the subject of heated debate, moral relativism is a cluster of doctrines concerning diversity of moral judgment across time, societies and individuals. Descriptive relativism is the doctrine that extensive diversity exists and that it concerns values and principles central to moralities. Meta-ethical relativism is the doctrine that there ...
Jan 1, 2021 · Descriptive relativism is the hypothesis that there are pervasive and irresolvable moral disagreements between individuals or cultures. Metaethical relativism holds that moral claims can only be evaluated as true or false relative to a particular individual or culture’s moral standards.
A similar tension appears to shape Richard Brandt's presentation of relativism in “Ethical Relativism,” in Edwards, Paul, ed., The Encyclopedia of Philosophy (New York: MacMillan, 1967), vol. 3, p. 75.Google Scholar He defines “meta-ethical relativism” as the denial “that there is always one correct moral evaluation” on a given ...
