Mar 10, 2018 · What is an inherent problem with moral relativism? Selected Answer: It can become contradictory; two people can perceive one action as right and wrong. Correct Answer: It can become contradictory; two people can perceive one action as right and wrong.
Jan 10, 2017 · Question 17 4 out of 4 points What is an inherent problem with moral relativism? Selected Answer : It can become contradictory ; two people can perceive one action as right and wrong . Correct Answer : It can become contradictory ; two people can perceive one action as right and wrong .
Question 13 4 out of 4 points Which is an inherent problem with moral relativism? Answer Selected Answer: It can become contradictory; two people can perceive one action as right and wrong. Correct Answer: It can become contradictory; two people can …
Jun 16, 2015 · Question 12 4 out of 4 points Which is an inherent problem with moral relativism? Answer Selected Answer: Correct Answer: It can become contradictory; two people can perceive one action as right and wrong. Question 13 4 out of 4 points Which of the following is the best example of an amoral claim?
Defining moral relativism is difficult because different writers use the term in slightly different ways; in particular, friends and foes of relativism often diverge considerably in their characterization of it. Therefore, it is important to first distinguish between some of the positions that have been identified or closely associated with moral relativism before setting out a definition that captures the main idea its adherents seek to put forward.
Moral relativism is the view that moral judgments are true or false only relative to some particular standpoint (for instance, that of a culture or a historical period) and that no standpoint is uniquely privileged over all others .
Relativistic views of morality first found expression in 5th century B .C.E. Greece, but they remained largely dormant until the 19th and 20th centuries. During this time, a number of factors converged to make moral relativism appear plausible.
Protagoras, who famously asserted that “man is the measure of all things,” seems to have embraced a wholesale relativism that extended to truth of any kind, but this view was uncommon. More popular and influential was the contrast that many drew between nomos (law, custom) and physis (nature, natural order).
This view of morality suggests that all moral outlooks are on the same logical plane, with none capable of being proved correct or superior to all the rest. There are relativistic tendencies in Marx’s critique of bourgeois morality as an ideology expressing certain class interests.
Moral relativism has been identified with all the above positions; and no formula can capture all the ways the term is used by both its advocates and its critics. But it is possible to articulate a position that most who call themselves moral relativists would endorse.
It holds that, as a matter of fact, moral beliefs and practices vary between cultures (and sometimes between groups within a single society). For instance, some societies condemn homosexuality, others accept it; in some cultures a student who corrects a teacher would be thought disrespectful; elsewhere such behavior might be encouraged.