Yahoo Web Search

Search results

  1. People also ask

  2. Feb 19, 2004 · The first point is a form of metaethical relativism: It says one morality may be true for one society and a conflicting morality may be true for another society. Hence, there is no one objectively correct morality for all societies. The second point, however, is a concession to moral objectivism.

    • Relativism

      1. What is Relativism? 1.1 The co-variance definition. 1.2...

  3. Moral relativism is the idea that there is no universal or absolute set of moral principles. It’s a version of morality that advocates “to each her own,” and those who follow it say, “Who am I to judge?”. Moral relativism can be understood in several ways.

  4. ethical relativism, the doctrine that there are no absolute truths in ethics and that what is morally right or wrong varies from person to person or from society to society. (Read Peter Singer’s Britannica entry on ethics.) Arguments for ethical relativism.

  5. Views commonly confused with moral relativism Moral relativism vs ethical subjectivism. Moral relativism is a distinct position from ethical subjectivism (the view that the truth of ethical claims are not mind independent). While these views are often held together, they do not entail each other.

  6. Aug 1, 1992 · Ethical relativism is the theory that holds that morality is relative to the norms of one's culture. That is, whether an action is right or wrong depends on the moral norms of the society in which it is practiced. The same action may be morally right in one society but be morally wrong in another.

  7. Feb 19, 2004 · Moral relativism has the unusual distinctionboth within philosophy and outside itof being attributed to others, almost always as a criticism, far more often than it is explicitly professed by anyone.