Moral relativism is the idea that moral judgments about what is right or wrong are not universal, but instead depend on the culture, society, or even the individual making them.
It comes in several forms: descriptive moral relativism simply observes that people and cultures actually disagree about what is moral.
Meta-ethical moral relativism goes further, claiming that terms like “good” or “bad” have no absolute meaning and their truth or falsehood depends entirely on local traditions and beliefs.
Normative moral relativism suggests that, because of this, people ought to tolerate moral differences, though not all philosophers agree this follows logically.
Key to moral relativism is the rejection of universal standards that apply everywhere; instead, what is considered moral is seen as shaped by customs, upbringing, or societal norms.
This can mean that actions seen as right in one culture may be wrong in another, and there’s no independent standard to say one is better than the other.
Critics argue that this makes it hard to resolve moral disagreements or even have meaningful discussions about right and wrong, while defenders point to the wide variety of beliefs and practices found around the world as evidence for their view.
Online Resources
- Moral relativism / Wikipedia
- Moral Relativism / SEP
- Moral Relativism / IEP
Please Note: This is my personal summary of the topic, shared both for my own records and in the hope it may be helpful to you. AI was used in parts to assist with the process.