Arguments Against Moral Relativism
This section of the site considers arguments against moral relativism. Moral relativism makes cross-cultural comparisons impossible, makes a nonsense of the idea of moral progress, and views the great reformers that have brought about moral progress as morally bad. Each of these absurd conclusions of moral relativism shows that moral relativism is false.
Cross-Cultural Comparisons
To make cross-cultural comparisons, we need cross-cultural standards; cultural relativism, though, is nothing more than the view that there are no such things. Cultural relativism therefore makes cross-cultural comparisons impossible; we cannot judge one culture to be either morally superior or inferior to another. Some such judgements, though, are valid, and there must therefore be cross-cultural standards. Cultural relativism must therefore be false.
Moral Progress
Not only does moral relativism entail that we cannot make legitimate moral comparisons of different cultures, it also entails that we cannot make legitimate moral comparisons of a single culture across time; we cannot judge whether a changing society is getting better or worse. Generally, though, we do think that we have made moral progress. Moral relativism, arguably, cannot make sense of this.
Great Reformers
Further, when we consider the great reformers that have helped to bring about those changes that we take to constitute moral progress, e.g. the abolition of slavery, or granting the working classes and women the right to vote, we generally think these reformers are moral exemplars. According to cultural relativism, though, these great reformers were bad people; they acted in opposition to the values of their particular cultural contexts.
|
