Philosophy Relativism Criticism Rachel

meta ethical

• premise: different cultures have different moral codes 
• conclusion: therefore, there is no objective truth and morality

logic is invalid. jackson is a mammal therefore jackson is a human

• A. we could not criticize another culture for something that is obviously wrong (ie slavery, segregation, etc)
• B. we could not criticize our own culture for something that is obviously wrong (ie apartheid)
• C. If relativism is correct, there would be no moral progress/change (ie womens right)

differences in cultures due to: environment, religion, factual belief BUT share moral value

ie greek burn dead, callatian eat dead, both do it as a respect for the dead

• lying is wrong
• don't murder
• care and protect for the young

tolerance and open mindedness

• 1. conclusion doesn't follow premise 
• 2. if relativism is correct, there would be negative unacceptable consequences
• 3. cultures/society is not as different as they seem or appear