I. preliminaries

Abstract

Rampant moral relativism is widely decried as the leading source of the degeneracy of modern life.1 Though I proudly count myself a relativist, I rather doubt that relativism has anything like the cultural influence that its most ardent critics fearfully attribute to it. Much of what gets criticized under the rubric of relativism is often really no such thing. Relativists need not be hedonists, egoists, nihilists or even moral skeptics. Moreover, when it comes to the upper reaches of our intellectual culture, relativism is more often dismissed than defended.2 I don’t deny that in certain literary corners of academe, relativism retains a fashionable post-modern cache.3 But in more sober philosophical circles, the catalog of ills from which relativism is widely thought to suffer is impressive.4 When taken as a characterization of the nature of moral discourse and moral argument, relativism is often thought to be descriptively inadequate. Contra the relativist, we do not treat moral disputes as rationally irresolvable. We do not tolerate all alternative moral “codes” as equally valid. Relativism may be true of merely cultural norms or practices. But morality has a felt universality that makes it quite different in character from a system of merely cultural norms or practices. In the face of morally abhorrent practices, we don’t simply shrug our shoulders and say that while the relevant practices may be wrong for us, they are alright for them. Relativism is sometimes even said to be self-undermining. It makes the very thing it purports to explain – the possibility of rationally intractable disagreements – impossible in the first place. Partly because of its supposedly self-undermining character, relativism is sometimes accused of being a strictly incredible doctrine. Those who profess to be relativists must, if this is true, either be insincere, confused, or self-deceived. Though someone might well sincerely hold the mistaken second-order belief that she believes that she believes that relativism is true, no one, in his or her deepest heart of hearts, sincerely, non selfdeceptively and informedly believes that relativism is true..

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,923

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Similar books and articles

Defence of Cultural Relativism.Seungbae Park - 2011 - Cultura 8 (1):159-170.
Is Relativism Self-Defeating?Harold Zellner - 1995 - Journal of Philosophical Research 20:287-295.
Relativism and reflexivity.Robert Lockie - 2003 - International Journal of Philosophical Studies 11 (3):319 – 339.
System relativism.Charles Sayward - 1988 - Ratio 1 (2):163-175.
Moral Relativism in Context.James R. Beebe - 2010 - Noûs 44 (4):691-724.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
33 (#498,801)

6 months
1 (#1,511,647)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Kenneth Taylor
PhD: University of Chicago; Last affiliation: Stanford University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references