Group 2

Ethical Relativism

Group Members: Gonzales, Frederick D.

Koch, Catherine Kyle S.
Liwag, Earl John C.
Reyes, Robin Gabriel
Sto. Tomas, Miguel Adrian
Yañez, Janella Yvette
 GR OUP 2

ME MBERS:

REYES, ROBIN GABRIEL YAÑEZ, JANELLA YVETTE STO. TOMAS, MIGUEL ADRIAN
Group Leader, Presenter Introduction
Ethical Relativism Discussion
 GR OUP 2

ME MBERS:

KOCH, CATHERINE KYLE S. Liwag, Earl John C. GONZALES, FREDERICK D.

Ethical Relativism Discussion Sample Cases Summary
 INTRODUCTION
Ethical theory is an essentially formal explanation of what we should do
when faced with an ethical quandary, as well as a clear, thorough explanation
of what ethical obligations are.

Ethical Relativism is an Ethical Theory that is raised by differences in moral

practices between cultures. Ethical relativism is classified into two types:
subjective ethical relativism, in which all moral principles are justified by
their acceptance by an individual agent, and conventional ethical relativism,
in which no moral norms apply to everyone. Instead, depending on culture or
individual preference, all moral rules are legitimate.
 DISCUSSION
Ethical Relativism - started in the 19th Century wherein Christian
missionaries used coercion to change the customs of pagan tribal people.

List of changes occurred:

• They clothed them

• Separated wives from their husbands to create monogamous households
• Made the Sabbath a day of rest
• Ended infanticide
 DISCUSSION
- progress in understanding cultural diversity

- Anthropology has exposed our fondness for ethnocentrism.

- Ethnocentrism is condemned as a form of prejudice equivalent to

racism and sexism.

Moral Objectivism - view that there are universal and objective moral
principles valid for all people.
 DISCUSSION

Two main forms of ethical relativism:

Subjective Ethical Relativism

and
Conventional Ethical Relativism
 DISCUSSION
Subjective Ethical Relativism - all moral principles are justified by
virtue of their acceptance by an individual agent.

- Little or no interpersonal criticism or judgment is possible.

- only meet in radical collisions

- Only plausible view must be one that grounds morality in the group
or culture.
 DISCUSSION
Conventional Ethical Relativism - sometimes referred to as
conventionalism.

- cultural acceptance

- no moral rules applies to everyone

The Diversity and Dependency Theses - moral rightness and

wrongness of actions varies from society to society.
 DISCUSSION
Diversity Thesis
- also called as cultural relativism
- moral norms vary from one culture to the next
- The humanity permits a variety of alternative cultures and ethical
norms.

Dependency Thesis
- The actions are contextualized by the norms of the society.
- It relies on the society's aims, desires, beliefs, history, and
surroundings.
 DISCUSSION
Conventional Ethical Relativism and Tolerance

- According to Ruth Benedict, “We shall arrive at a more realistic social

faith, accepting as grounds of hope and as new bases for tolerance the
coexisting and equally valid patterns of life…”

- Scheper-Hughes claims that making snap judgments about other cultures

is arrogant as it assumes that we are more knowledgeable about good and
wrong than the people of that society.
 DISCUSSION
Hence, as per Melville Herskovits;

• If morality is relative to its culture, then there is no independent basis

for criticizing the morality of any other culture but one’s own.
• If there is no independent way of criticizing any other culture, then
we ought to be tolerant of the moralities of other cultures.
• Morality is relative to its culture.
• Therefore, we ought to be tolerant of the moralities of other cultures.
 SAMPLE CASES
Ethical Relativism does not claim that there is no source of
obligation nor there are no actions that are morally wrong.

An example of ethical relativism is when a pregnant woman who has

a belief that abortion is morally incorrect decides to abort a potential
human being. It will be considered as wrong since relativists do not
have to abandon the objectivity of moral judgments.
 SAMPLE CASES

Another example would be the Muslim people, who have to cover

and hide their bodies, including their hair. The majority of the
population is not mandated to meet these clothing requirements.
However, in their culture, it is the proper way of dressing up; hence,
it is not and will not be considered as wrong.
 LIMITATIONS
Conventional Ethical Relativism Undermines Important Values

- We cannot justifiably criticize somebody who follows what we may consider

to be a heinous principle. If proper criticism presumes an objective or
impartial norm, as appears to be the case, then relativists cannot morally
criticize anyone outside their own culture.

- Moral reformers are people of conscience, such as Mohandas Gandhi and

Martin Luther King, who go against traditional norms. However, conventional
ethical relativism holds that their activities are technically immoral since they
contradict dominant cultural values.
 LIMITATIONS
Conventional Ethical Relativism Leads to Subjectivism

- A third important value that conventional ethical relativism undermines is

the close connection between morality and the law.

- The notion of a culture or society is notoriously difficult to define.

- Relativism tells us that if a person belongs to societies with conflicting

moralities, then that person must be judged in both ways.

- reduce subjectivism which leads to moral solipsism

 LIMITATIONS
Moral Diversity Is Exaggerated

- A third problem is that the level of moral diversity that we actually see
around the world is not as extreme as relativists.

- A whole issue of moral diversity among cultures is irrelevant to the truth

or falsehood of conventional ethical relativism.

- A denial of complete cultural relativism that does not disprove ethical

relativism.
 LIMITATIONS
Weak Dependency Does Not Imply Relativism - concerns the dependency
thesis that all moral principles derive their validity from cultural acceptance.

The two distinct ways are a weak and a strong version;

Weak dependency - an application of moral principles depends on one’s

culture.

Strong dependency - a moral principles themselves depend on one’s culture.

 LIMITATIONS
- The weak thesis says that the application of principles depends on
the particular cultural predicament, whereas the strong thesis affirms
that the principles themselves depend on that predicament.

- Accordingly, the ethical relativist must maintain the stronger thesis,

which insists that the very validity of the principles is a product of the
culture and that different cultures will invent different valid
principles.
 LIMITATIONS
The Indeterminacy of Language

- A theory, set forth by Willard V. Quine (1908–2000), holds that languages

are often so fundamentally different from each other.

- It holds that language is the essence of a culture and shapes its reality.
This implies that each society’s moral principles depend on its unique
linguistically grounded culture.

- Each culture does have a particular language with different meanings—

indeed, each person has their own set of meanings.
 SUMMARY
Ethical relativism is a point of view in which there is no definitive
standard or set of rules that determines the morality of an act
universally; rather, it is based on cultural differences in moral
practices. However, the Theory weakens essential values by allowing
us to rightfully criticise anyone who follows what we may consider to
be an abhorrent concept. If proper criticism presumes an objective or
impartial norm, as appears to be the case, then relativists cannot
morally criticise anyone outside their own culture. The idea also
undermines the crucial link between morality and the law.
 REFERENCES
Drew, C., & PhD. (2022, July 1). 15 Moral Relativism Examples (2022). Helpfulprofessor.com.
https://helpfulprofessor.com/moral-relativism-examples/

Frederiksen, C.S., Nielsen, M.E.J. (2013). Ethical Theories. In: Idowu, S.O., Capaldi, N., Zu, L., Gupta,
A.D. (eds) Encyclopedia of Corporate Social Responsibility. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28036-8_613

MacDonald, C. & Marcoux A. (n.d.). Ethical Theory: Overview. Concise Encyclopedia of Business Ethics.
https://conciseencyclopedia.org/entries/ethical-theory/

Pojman, L. P., & Fieser, J. (2009). Ethics : Discovering Right and Wrong (6th ed., pp. 14–27). Wadsworth,
Cengage Learning

Velasquez, M. et al. (1992, August). Ethical Relativism. Markkula Center for Applied Ethics.
https://www.scu.edu/ethics/ethics-resources/ethical-decision-making/ethical-relativism/#:~:text=Ethical
%20relativism%20is%20the%20theory,be%20morally%20wrong%20in%20another.
Thank You!
Do you ha ve an y que stion?