Moral Relativism, By James Rachels

1965 Words8 Pages
In philosophy there are many theories that philosophers argue, James Rachels argues the main points of moral relativism, where he describes the differences within cultures. Philosophers attempt to prove their theories to be true, but it can be complicated because if someone proves one premise false of your argument then the entire argument is invalid. There are different types of relativisms that favor moral relativism, such as, personal belief relativism, societal belief relativism, and then there is the cultural beliefs argument. All of these topics of relativism fall into the same category as moral relativism, meaning they all have the same general statement. Which is one cannot declare what is morally right or morally wrong. Moral relativism is the umbrella term and the others are points that can affect it. Moral Relativism claims that there is no objective truth concerning morality, therefore no one can draw a line between what is right or wrong. An argument is an attempt to prove that something is true (or probably true) by offering evidence. In philosophy there are usually three premises that are part of the argument. Premises are evidence used to attempt to prove the conclusion. The third premise is the one that sums up that argument. Arguments can be objectively true or subjectively true. For an argument, x is objectively true if and only if x is the case, and x is subjectively true for S if and only if x coheres with S’s worldview of X is simply a matter of taste.
Open Document