The A to Z of isms... relativism.
Moral relativism is the view that what's right in one culture
may be wrong in another,
and that there's no way of judging between the two - it's all relative.
There's no absolute truth of the matter.
Different strokes for different folks -
and that's OK.
Imagine a Martian landing on Earth -
she would see that people behave differently in different places.
They've got different moral rules, different social customs.
What's right in one location is wrong in another.
She might well conclude
that there's no such thing as 'the right way to live'
or the 'right thing to do' for everyone at all times.
It's all a matter of cultural norms.
So in parts of Spain, bullfighting is seen as a spectacle,
whereas in many other countries it's considered outrageous cruelty.
Try setting up a bull ring in present-day London, for instance.
If the visiting Martian could get an overview of the history of the world,
she'd see that in Ancient Rome it was fine
to have gladiatorial combat to the death and to own slaves,
but that both practices would be widely frowned upon
in present-day Rome.
Or Amsterdam. Or elsewhere.
Attending fights to the death and keeping slaves
was acceptable for the Romans, but would be wrong in today's Europe.
This sort of relativism has been popular with some anthropologists,
who've attempted to appreciate other cultures from within,
understanding sets of interwoven practices
as responses to particular circumstances and traditions.
They recognise that morality is different in different cultures,
and they often argue that it's ethnocentric
to impose your own set of values elsewhere, as if you know best.
Such non-judgmental relativism might seem attractive,
but think about Nazi Germany.
There it became socially acceptable, and even required,
to treat Jews, homosexuals, and Gypsies as less than human.
This became 'right' there, both legally and morally.
A relativist would simply have to bite the bullet,
and say that that was indeed 'right' for Nazi Germany -
that's what morality meant there -
and that a morality which treats everybody with equal respect
is no better or worse than the Nazi way of doing things -
just different.
Unless you want to embrace that sort of repugnant conclusion,
it's probably best to steer clear of moral relativism.
Some people go further, and say that everything is relative, even truth.
That what is true at one time and one place
isn't true for everyone everywhere.
Or that there's no such thing as objective truth,
just the truth according to me.
We see hints of this in politics today.
There is a big problem with this sort of relativism though,
the theory of relativism itself would have to, on its own account,
be relative.
So the theory that truth is relative couldn't be absolutely true.
Thanks for watching. Don’t forget to subscribe! :)