Moral Relativism

Moral relativism is used by many today to justify actions and defend arguments.  In this post I will explore what moral relativism is, whether anyone actually believes it, and whether it is plausible.


What is moral relativism?

Moral Relativism is a family of views that state that there are no moral absolutes.  Rather moral right and wrong are relative to something else (such as ideals, cultures, feelings, etc.).

For the sake of brevity and utility, in this post we will define moral relativity as "the view that there are not moral absolutes, but rather moral truth varies from individual to individual".  (See Appendix below for more information.)


Do you really believe in moral relativism?

By definition, moral relativity does not merely mean that people can differ on moral beliefs, it means that two people who make two mutually exclusive moral decisions are both actually morally right.  Here is an example to illustrate:

• Steve believes stealing is bad.  
• John believes stealing is good.  
• Steve witnesses a car robbery that he has the power to stop and he stops it.   
• Joe witnesses the same car robbery, but instead he helps the robbers.
• According to moral relativity, Steve and John do not just have different moral views, they both actually did the morally right thing.

Does that make sense to you?

Let's try another one.  If you believe in relativism then what the Nazis did in the holocaust is not only acceptable, it was right thing to do.

I don't think anyone believes that.

We can try again with a more recent example.  If you believe in moral relativism, then hijacking a plane, flying it into a building, and killing hundreds of people can be the right thing to do if you believe it is right.

You don't believe that.

Believing in moral relativity means theft, racism, sexism, slavery, murder, and rape are morally correct if the person believes they are correct.

If you believe any of those things are wrong, then you aren't a moral relativist.


Is moral relativism even logically plausible?

According to moral relativism there are no absolute moral truths.  However, this statement IS a moral absolute.  It has already contradicted itself.  Moral relativism refutes itself.  So no, it is not logically plausible.


Conclusion

In short, no one actually believes in moral relativism.  So don't let people get away with saying they do.  

If they persist in asserting that they believe in moral relativism use the examples above to show them that they really don't believe in it.  (Or better yet, just steal their car...they shouldn't care...right?)

Now stop wasting time on this non-sense!

Keep Pursuing

Appendix

Fun with Relativism

Relativism rejects absolutes as its premise.  As a result, relativism cannot offer a single reason why it is true.  It cannot prove or disprove anything.  As soon as it makes an absolute statement it is proven wrong.  Here is some silly fun you can have with relativists:

1. A Moral Relativist asserts there is no right and wrong
2. A Moral Absolutist asserts that stealing is absolutely wrong
3. A Moral Relativist asserts the Absolutists is wrong
4. 1 and 3 contradict each other...Poof

1. Moral Relativism and Moral Absolutism are mutually exclusive
2. Moral Relativism states there is no right and no wrong
3. Therefor Moral Relativism cannot be right...Poof

1. Moral Relativism and Moral Absolutism are mutually exclusive
2. Moral Relativism states there is no right and no wrong
3. Therefor Moral Absolutism cannot be wrong...Poof

1. Moral Relativism states there are no moral absolutes
2. 1 is an absolute moral statement...Poof

Deeper Dive...

The definition of moral relativism used in this post does not capture the dizzying complexities of the meta-ethical discussions in moral relativism.  However, the definition we used will cover the 90% of the conversations you will have on moral relativism.

The definition used here is the definition championed by most people claiming morality is relative.  It is rare for people to have done ANY research into true moral relativity and its implications.

However, should you come across an "educated" moral relativist, the FIRST thing you need to do is ask him for his definition of moral relativity.  (Do not let him get away with switching between theories whenever it is convenient.)

After you learn the full extent of his brand of relativism you can explore the following resources for more than you ever wanted to read about this nonsense:

Dr. Robert Noggle
Moral Relativism: What It Is, and Why You Probably Don't Really Believe It 

Dr. Peter Kreeft
A Refutation of Moral Relativism 

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Relativism 

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Moral Relativism