Ethical Relativism

Ethical Relativism

In this paper, I will investigate the views of Pojman on ethical relativism. I see there are rather strong arguments against ethical relativism. Furthermore, several sub groups are presented about ethical relativism such as tolerance, subjectivism and conventionalism. I will further explain as to why ethical relativism can be argued.

Pojman first discusses the how ethical relativism can be argued. He separates ethical relativism into two sub categories, subjective and conventional relativism. Later, he discusses several theses that coincide with ethical relativism. Throughout the chapter, he gives specific examples to why he can counter argue the said argument for ethical relativism, such as diversity, dependency and tolerance theses. Towards the end of the chapter, Pojman claims that conventional relativism leads to subjective relativism. Pojman is fairly straightforward with in his approach to each argument for ethical relativism. Stating said argument, following an example plus an explanation to why his counter argument is superior. Tolerance is one argument supporters of ethical relativism try to prove its validity.

I believe the main argument for ethical relativism is the principles of tolerance. People are supposed to be tolerant and accept other culture’s traditions. Why should one culture criticize another culture over their beliefs or traditions? Who is to say the one criticizing has better morals than the other? One culture can truly believe that their traditions are necessary and morally right even if seen as immoral by other cultures. At the same time, that same culture is thinking the other cultures are immoral as well. Tolerance seems like it would have a good argument at first glance. However, after looking into what tolerance means in this case, it increasingly became less of an argument. Culturally driven, tolerance can be very discretionary. Depending on how tolerant the specific culture is, the more or less tolerant to...