Ethical Relativism: An In-Depth Exploration

Categories: Ethics


Ethical relativism is a complex and widely debated theory that challenges the notion of universalized moral standards. It posits that moral principles and practices vary across different societies and cultures, leading to the belief that there are no absolute moral truths applicable to all people at all times. While ethical relativism has been critiqued and rejected by many ethicists, it remains a thought-provoking and influential perspective in the realm of ethics. This essay delves into the intricacies of ethical relativism, exploring its foundations, limitations, and its impact on cultural diversity and moral discourse.

Foundations of Ethical Relativism

Ethical relativism finds its roots in the belief that moral standards are contingent upon the cultural, societal, and historical contexts in which they emerge. It contends that the same behavior or situation may be deemed morally acceptable in one society while being considered morally unacceptable in another. This relativistic perspective stands in contrast to the notion of universal moral principles that apply universally, regardless of cultural or temporal differences.

Get quality help now
checked Verified writer

Proficient in: Ethics

star star star star 4.7 (348)

“ Amazing as always, gave her a week to finish a big assignment and came through way ahead of time. ”

avatar avatar avatar
+84 relevant experts are online
Hire writer

Rejection of Ethical Relativism

Despite its prominence in ethical discourse, ethical relativism faces significant opposition from ethicists who argue against its core tenets. One of the primary objections is that while the moral practices of societies may indeed differ, the fundamental moral principles do not. Ethical relativism, they argue, overlooks the existence of universal ethical principles that apply across all societies and at all times.

For instance, ethical values such as fairness, honesty, and respect for individual autonomy are seen as applicable and essential to all societies, transcending cultural boundaries and historical contexts.

Get to Know The Price Estimate For Your Paper
Number of pages
Email Invalid email

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy. We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

"You must agree to out terms of services and privacy policy"
Write my paper

You won’t be charged yet!

Ethical relativism's failure to acknowledge the universality of these core principles is a point of contention among its critics.

Furthermore, ethical relativism is criticized for promoting social complacency and hindering moral progress within a society. By emphasizing the relativity of ethics and suggesting that all moral systems are equally valid, ethical relativism may discourage efforts to challenge and improve upon existing moral norms. This lack of room for moral reform and enhancement is a significant drawback of the relativistic perspective.

Challenges in Ethical Relativism

Ethical relativism encounters challenges at both theoretical and practical levels. The theory's limitations are rooted in its inability to reconcile the tension between moral universality and cultural diversity. While it recognizes the diversity of moral practices across societies, it struggles to explain the existence of shared moral values and principles that seem to transcend these differences.

Theoretical Limitations

Ethical relativism separates moral universality and particularity, creating a dichotomy that fails to capture the nuanced relationship between these two aspects of morality. Critics argue that while specific moral practices may differ, there are fundamental moral principles, such as those mentioned earlier, that hold true across all societies. The relativistic perspective tends to overlook this interconnectedness.

Additionally, ethical relativism often misunderstands the relationship between moral diversity and moral unity. It highlights the differences in moral practices while neglecting the shared moral ground that exists among societies. This oversimplification limits the theory's ability to provide a comprehensive understanding of the moral landscape.

Practical Limitations

Practically, ethical relativism can lead to moral crises in societies where diverse cultural, regional, or individual moral beliefs coexist. When members of a society lack a common agreement on certain moral issues, determining the "right" course of action becomes challenging. This practical limitation can hinder social cohesion and decision-making processes.

Furthermore, ethical relativism can inadvertently promote a fragmented and individualistic approach to moral decision-making. When individuals or social groups prioritize their own moral perspectives without seeking common ground, it can lead to a breakdown in moral consensus and cooperation, especially in cross-cultural interactions.

Historical Development of Ethical Relativism

Ethical relativism is not a new concept; it has roots in the thoughts and philosophies of thinkers from various cultures and time periods. This historical context sheds light on the evolution of ethical relativism and its enduring relevance in contemporary ethical discussions.

Ancient Philosophical Perspectives

Ancient philosophers, including Mahavira and Protagoras, laid the groundwork for ethical relativism. Mahavira's Anekantavada principle emphasized the perception of truth and reality from diverse viewpoints, suggesting that no single perspective holds the complete truth. Protagoras famously asserted that "man is the measure of all things," highlighting the subjective nature of human experiences and judgments. These early ideas questioned the existence of an objective standard of morality.

Herodotus, another ancient Greek thinker, observed that each society regarded its own belief system and way of life as superior to all others, contributing to the notion that ethical judgments are influenced by cultural biases. These ancient philosophers set the stage for later discussions on moral relativism.

Modern Ethical Thought

In the early modern era, philosophers like Baruch Spinoza and David Hume continued to challenge the idea of inherent moral absolutes. Spinoza argued that nothing is inherently good or evil, suggesting that moral judgments are context-dependent. Hume, often considered the father of modern emotivism and moral relativism, distinguished between matters of fact and matters of value. He contended that moral judgments were rooted in sentiment and passion, emphasizing their subjective nature.

While Hume did not explicitly endorse relativism, his work paved the way for the development of moral relativistic perspectives. He questioned the existence of an objective moral standard and emphasized the role of sentiment in moral judgments, contributing to the emergence of relativistic viewpoints in ethics.

Levels and Types of Western Ethical Relativism

Ethical relativism is a multifaceted concept with various levels and types, reflecting the complexity of ethical thinking. Understanding these nuances is crucial for a comprehensive examination of ethical relativism.

Levels of Ethical Relativism

Ethical relativism can be categorized into three main levels, each offering distinct perspectives on moral relativism:

1. Standard-Level Ethical Relativism

At the standard level, ethical relativism posits that the accuracy of ethical norms is relative. It contends that no ethical principle is universally right or wrong. Instead, moral standards are deemed correct when the majority of individuals within a given cultural context agree with them. This level acknowledges the relativity of moral principles but does not assert that they are always relative; rather, it recognizes the existence of multiple moral standards within a society.

2. Hierarchy-Level Ethical Relativism

Hierarchy-level ethical relativism delves deeper into the diversity of ethical systems. It argues that different ethical systems can explain social life to a similar extent. This perspective advocates that different or opposing ethical systems can coexist and possess moral validity. It challenges the notion of a single, universally applicable ethical system that encompasses all of society.

3. Principle-Level Ethical Relativism

Principle-level ethical relativism is closely connected to hierarchy-level relativism and is often difficult to distinguish from it. It emphasizes the coexistence of different ethical systems that can equally explain social life. This level challenges the idea of a single, overarching ethical system that applies universally. It underscores the notion that moral principles vary and do not adhere to a singular standard for all societies.

Types of Ethical Relativism

Ethical relativism can also be classified into three main types, each offering unique perspectives on moral diversity:

1. Cultural Ethical Relativism

Cultural ethical relativism contends that different cultural systems necessitate different moral standards. It argues that each culture possesses its own criteria for determining right from wrong, good from bad. This perspective asserts that a unique cultural criterion is required to judge the behavior of individuals within that culture. Cultural ethical relativism can be further divided into descriptive, standard, and cognitive forms, depending on the focus of the analysis.

2. Experiential Ethical Relativism

Experiential ethical relativism maintains that the variability and relativity of morality are not merely conceptual but grounded in actual experiences. It suggests that individuals from different groups undergo distinct moral experiences, leading to variations in their use of moral principles and norms. This perspective advocates adapting moral principles to align with each individual's unique moral experiences.

3. Subjective Ethical Relativism

Subjective ethical relativism posits that morality is solely a product of individual subjectivity. It views morality as a manifestation of personal attitudes, emotions, and psychological requirements. According to this perspective, moral judgments are entirely subjective and reflect an individual's inner cognizance of what is right or wrong. Subjective ethical relativism underscores the subjectivity of morality.


Ethical relativism, despite its limitations and criticisms, remains a thought-provoking and influential theory in the field of ethics. It challenges the idea of universal moral standards and highlights the diversity of moral practices across societies, cultures, and historical contexts. While ethical relativism faces opposition from those who assert the existence of fundamental moral principles, it continues to foster discussions on cultural diversity, moral subjectivity, and the intricacies of human ethics.

Through an exploration of its historical development and various levels and types, ethical relativism provides valuable insights into the complex relationship between cultural relativity and shared moral values. While it may not offer a definitive answer to the question of whether ethics are relative or universal, it encourages open-mindedness, cross-cultural understanding, and the recognition of diverse moral perspectives.

Ultimately, ethical relativism challenges us to navigate the complex terrain of morality, acknowledging both its universality and its contextual variability. It serves as a reminder that ethical discourse is an ongoing journey of exploration and reflection, shaped by the rich tapestry of human experiences and cultures.

Updated: Nov 02, 2023
Cite this page

Ethical Relativism: An In-Depth Exploration. (2018, Oct 05). Retrieved from

Ethical Relativism: An In-Depth Exploration essay
Live chat  with support 24/7

👋 Hi! I’m your smart assistant Amy!

Don’t know where to start? Type your requirements and I’ll connect you to an academic expert within 3 minutes.

get help with your assignment