Difference between Relativism and Subjectivism
Ethical Relativism
Ethical relativism views that the morality or code of ethics depends on time, place, individual and the culture of a given society. That is, the moral beliefs are relative to the society or an individual. In other words, there are no objective wrongs, rights hence they are not universal. If two individuals or societies do not agree about moral codes, both of them are equally correct with their opposing views. Ethical relativism falls into two categories:
Subjectivism
In this case, if an individual thinks that something or he is morally right, then a different case arising where an individual claims is right, all the others are refuted. The statements are relative to that person. If one has his ethical views and another person has different ones, then neither of the views are correct or one of them being better than the other one (Shchipunov, 2015) . That is, everyone in his own individual perspective is correct regarding his own beliefs. Here, there is no idea of being incorrect since it does not apply to what people belief morally. It, actually, involves taking a position that none of the positions are either right or wrong. Furthermore, it considers all positions to be equal and thus each individual has the mandate to decide what is generally right and applies to their lives. In subjectivism, everything is about personal feelings.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Cultural Relativism
In this case, the ethical statements are relative to society. This view is motivation by the diversification of culture. That means, different communities have different beliefs or customs, and every individual is attached to a given community. These individuals that the views of his community are correct, however, in a real sense, no society has beliefs which are better or worse than another society or the manner they live. It is because every culture has a set of traditions that enable people to live within some given guidelines on what is acceptable or not acceptable to them (Shchipunov, 2015) . Moreover, the way one believes that something is right is not necessarily apparent that a different culture will assume so. Cultural relativism holds that anything that culture says is right is correct for that culture and if anything is wrong, then that culture refutes it. Thus, each moral ethics are proper. A cultural relativist believes that it is not right or ethical to judge another culture and that a given culture is not unique but just a society that is among many other societies, thus, the moral codes of that society binds all the wrong and right actions of that community.
Objections on Subjectivism
Subjectivism has no account for disagreement, that is, two people having a different view are not in dispute with one another. Therefore, the problem is that it refutes itself. One person is thinking that he is morally right and another individual rising and claiming that he is right too will invalidate the other. Thus, it does not give room for arguments on what is acceptable or wrong even though one might be wrong or right. In this case, one is made to agree that a given ethic is right or how someone feels (Shchipunov, 2015) . For example, if an individual believes that racism is correct, then according to him, he is right, and no argument can be raised on that yet, in a real sense, he could be very wrong. So the issue is that all others who have different views cannot argue and it, therefore, becomes right to them. In other words, it creates a lot of uncertainty because an individual act on his conscience, that is, what he believes to be right. For example, if a tutor awards one student a pass based on his culture and another one fail, then personally he is right, and that cannot be accounted for, thus leading to absurd situations since no one can challenge another person opinions or feelings.
Objections to Cultural Relativism
Cultural relativism does not give space for the condemnation of one culture. That is, if a particular society acknowledges murder or racism, it would not be right for another community to condemn since every culture is morally right. Since that society deems that the actions are right, no other community will condemn them. In this manner, the verdict is not correct since we believe that the other society is making a mistake concerning morality (Shchipunov, 2015) . In others, words one is not able to criticize another culture on what they do. If ethical relativism is true, then we would not be having other societies criticizing other, for example, we would not be having troops going to other nations to condemn what others are doing. All actions and beliefs regarding a particular community could always be right without objection from others. There is lack of justification on explanations of different cultures and thus will lead to abnormal behaviors from some societies as a result of differences. Sensibly, the fact that, for instance, one belonging to a given race is not a scientific basis but a social construct. If one of the races perform actions that do not conform to a different race, then there is no argument about that because it is right in their jurisdiction and thus cultural relativism does not give an opportunity to determine whether that action is right or wrong. Therefore, it lacks an account of activities of other culture.
References
Shchipunov, O. (2015). Ethical relativism: P hilosophical approaches to the study. Contemporary Problems of Social Work , 1 (2), 58-62. doi: 10.17922/2412-5466-2015-1-2-58-62 .
