Moral relativism is the idea that moral judgments, what is right or wrong, are not universal truths but depend on cultural, societal, or individual perspectives. In other words, there’s no single objective moral standard that applies to everyone everywhere.
Key idea
Instead of saying “this action is always wrong,” moral relativism says:
“this action is considered wrong in this context or culture.”
Types of moral relativism
- Cultural relativism
Morality depends on the norms of a society.- Example: Practices seen as acceptable in one culture may be condemned in another.
- Individual (subjective) relativism
Morality depends on personal beliefs.- Example: If a person believes something is right, then it is right for them.
Contrast with opposing view
Moral relativism may often contrasted with moral absolutism, which claims that some moral principles are universally true regardless of culture or opinion (“criminal violence is always wrong”).
Strengths
- Encourages tolerance and understanding of different cultures
- Recognizes that moral practices evolve over time
- Avoids imposing one culture’s values on others
Criticisms
- It may make it hard to criticize harmful practices (oppression)
- May lead to moral inconsistency
- Raises the question: if everything is relative, may anything be truly wrong?
Simple example
- In one culture, eating certain animals is normal.
- In another, it may be seen as morally wrong.
A relativist would say neither is “universally correct”, each is valid within its own context. - Shervan K Shahhian
LIBERTY PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION 