24.00: Problems of Philosophy Prof. Sally Haslanger November 19. 2001 Moral relativism The problem of moral relativism begins with the fact of moral diversity: different cultures have different moral codes. Of course, it's not just between different national cultures that moral opinions differ; the same can happen between different subcultures of the same national culture. What does this show? Consider Moral diversity: Different cultures have different moral codes/values. Does it even follow that Moral conflict: Different cultures have conflicting moral codes/values Does moral diversity imply moral disagreement? Not obviously. Consider i) different definitions, e.g., of euthanasia, rape, terrorism, self-defense ii)different factual assumptions Nevertheless, there does seem to be at least some genuine moral disagreement around. The most famous such issue is probably abortion. Some people disagree about abortion because they disagree on whether abortion is killing a person, since they have different views about what counts as a person. Yet sometimes people agree that it is in some sense a person, but disagree about whether it is permissible in such cases to take a life. Cultures disagree about right and wrong in a way that cannot be explained by assigning different meanings to their words or in terms of background factual disagreements. What does this tell us about morality? Moral objectivists hold that there are genuine moral truths, and that some cultures have got ahold uis truth. while others are somehow missing it. This would be to treat moral laws as akin to physical laws. All that diversity shows is how very difficult it can be to get ahold of the right moral laws. So this is one interpretation of moral disagreement moral objectivism tempered by a certain amount of moral skepticism, that is, doubts about our ability to know the objective moral truth. Yet this suggests is that we can' t really rely on our consciences in deciding what to do For our consciences were formed in this culture and it's not clear that this culture has the correct moral views Moral relativists note that different cultures have opposing legal codes; what's legally right or wrong depends on one's heir idea is that we should understand what's morally right or wrong in a way analogous to legal right or wrong In Britain it's legal to drive on the left-hand side of the street; in America it's not legal. This raises no deep philosophical quandaries. No one asks: Which is the truly legal way to drive? For we all realize that what is legal is relative to a setting. Same with etiquette. Why think that moral disagreements are any different? E. g, here is Wm. Graham Sumner (1906 The"right"way is the way which the ancestors used and which has been handed p The tradition is its own warrant. It is not held subject to verification by experience. The notion of right is folkways. It is not outside of them, of independent origin, and brought to test them. In the folkways, whatever is, is righi Which moral laws apply in a given part of the world is a function of the way those people have chosen to organize their lives. There is no universal moral truth; the moral code of a particular society determines what is right or wrong for24.00: Problems of Philosophy Prof. Sally Haslanger November 19, 2001 Moral Relativism The problem of moral relativism begins with the fact of moral diversity: different cultures have different moral codes. Of course, it's not just between different national cultures that moral opinions differ; the same can happen between different subcultures of the same national culture. What does this show? Consider: Moral diversity: Different cultures have different moral codes/values. Does it even follow that: Moral conflict: Different cultures have conflicting moral codes/values. Does moral diversity imply moral disagreement? Not obviously. Consider: i) different definitions, e.g., of euthanasia, rape, terrorism, self-defense. ii) different factual assumptions. Nevertheless, there does seem to be at least some genuine moral disagreement around. The most famous such issue is probably abortion. Some people disagree about abortion because they disagree on whether abortion is killing a person, since they have different views about what counts as a person. Yet sometimes people agree that it is in some sense a person, but disagree about whether it is permissible in such cases to take a life. Cultures disagree about right and wrong in a way that cannot be explained by assigning different meanings to their words or in terms of background factual disagreements. What does this tell us about morality? Moral Objectivists hold that there are genuine moral truths, and that some cultures have got ahold of this truth, while others are somehow missing it. This would be to treat moral laws as akin to physical laws. All that moral diversity shows is how very difficult it can be to get ahold of the right moral laws. So this is one interpretation of moral disagreement: moral objectivism tempered by a certain amount of moral skepticism, that is, doubts about our ability to know the objective moral truth. Yet this suggests is that we can't really rely on our consciences in deciding what to do. For our consciences were formed in this culture and it's not clear that this culture has the correct moral views. Moral relativists note that different cultures have opposing legal codes; what's legally right or wrong depends on one's society. Their idea is that we should understand what's morally right or wrong in a way analogous to legal right or wrong. In Britain it's legal to drive on the left-hand side of the street; in America it's not legal. This raises no deep philosophical quandaries. No one asks: Which is the truly legal way to drive? For we all realize that what is legal is relative to a given setting. Same with etiquette. Why think that moral disagreements are any different? E.g., here is Wm. Graham Sumner (1906): The "right" way is the way which the ancestors used and which has been handed down. The tradition is its own warrant. It is not held subject to verification by experience. The notion of right is in the folkways. It is not outside of them, of independent origin, and brought to test them. In the folkways, whatever is, is right... Which moral laws apply in a given part of the world is a function of the way those people have chosen to organize their lives. There is no universal moral truth; the moral code of a particular society determines what is right or wrong for