According to the textbook, the argument from disagreement for moral relativism is a compelling argument that challenges moral absolutism. This argument suggests that the fact that people from different cultures and societies hold diverse beliefs about ethical issues is evidence that morality is relative. In this article, we will delve deeper into this argument and explore its implications.
First, let us define moral relativism. Moral relativism is the belief that moral standards are not absolute but are relative to cultural, social, and historical context. According to this view, what is considered morally right or wrong varies from society to society and individual to individual. Therefore, there is no objective and universal moral truth.
The argument from disagreement suggests that the existence of moral disagreement among people from different cultures and societies undermines moral absolutism. Moral absolutism is the belief that there are universal and objective moral truths that apply to all people, regardless of their cultural or social context.
The argument can be stated as follows: If there were objective and universal moral truths, then people would agree on what is right and wrong. However, people from different cultures and societies hold diverse moral beliefs. Therefore, there are no objective and universal moral truths.
The argument from disagreement challenges moral absolutism by showing that there is no widely accepted set of moral values that all people agree on. It suggests that morality is relative to cultural and social context and that people develop their moral beliefs based on their upbringing, experiences, and environment.
However, this argument faces some objections. For example, some argue that the mere existence of disagreement does not prove that there is no objective moral truth. It could be the case that people are mistaken in their moral beliefs, or that some moral beliefs are more justified than others.
Furthermore, some argue that the argument from disagreement can be used to justify immoral practices. For example, if a culture practices female genital mutilation, and all members of that society agree that it is morally justified, does that mean it is acceptable? Or does it mean that people should not criticize this practice because it is relative to that culture?
In conclusion, the argument from disagreement for moral relativism is a compelling argument that challenges moral absolutism. The existence of moral disagreement among people from different cultures and societies suggests that morality is relative to cultural and social context. However, this argument faces objections, and it is essential to consider the implications of moral relativism carefully. As a professional, I can say that this topic is crucial for those interested in ethics and philosophy.