Ethical relativism (also known as moral relativism) is the view that ethical or moral values are not universal but rather relative to the individuals or societies that hold them.
There is no objective right or wrong; what is right for one person or culture may not be right for another.
Forms of Ethical Relativism
1. Personal or Individual Ethical Relativism
Ethical judgments and beliefs are expressions of individual moral outlook and attitudes.
No objective standard of right and wrong exists; each person’s perspective is valid.
Example: Geronticide (abandonment or killing of the elderly) in Inuit culture.
Individual relativists argue that outsiders have no right to judge this practice since morality is based on individual beliefs.
2. Social or Cultural Ethical Relativism
Ethical values and beliefs vary from society to society.
The basis of moral judgment lies within the social or cultural views of a group.
Example: The ancient Indian practice of sati (burning the wife on the husband's funeral pyre).
What may be seen as immoral by outsiders could be regarded as honorable within that culture.
Arguments Supporting Ethical Relativism
1. Diversity of Moral Values
The presence of disagreements on ethical issues suggests that objective truth is unattainable.
Ethical relativists argue that this indicates the inconceivability of universal moral standards.
2. Moral Uncertainty
There is significant difficulty in determining what is morally right or wrong.
This uncertainty further supports the idea that objective ethics are unattainable.
3. Situational Differences
Life circumstances and experiences differ greatly among individuals.
Therefore, what is right for one person may not be right for another.
Conclusion
Ethical relativism emphasizes the importance of individual and cultural perspectives on morality.
It suggests that no single viewpoint can claim supremacy over another without imposing an objective moral standard.