Philosophy 320
Professor Galloway
08/31/2017
Response: The Case Against Moral Relativism
As a student of Anthropology, I have been taught from day one to not only understand
the theory cultural relativism, but to practice it continuously in my studies and everyday life.
Cultural relativism was something I very quickly agreed with, due to the nature of anthropology
and the need for it in my future research. I have even argued for it in the past with peers of mine,
as well as my parents and other professors. In fact, even after reading the article, The Case
Against Moral Relativism by Louis Pojman, I still believe it to be true, however not to the extent
that I previously had.
I want to lay out some issues I had with Pojman’s article. He explains that subjectivism
states that morality is dependent on the individual, instead of a society or culture, like
conventionalism is. He then goes on to claim that subjectivism is much worse than
conventionalism because each individual is responsible for their own moral grounds and
eventually it would lead to everybody clashing with one another, trying to fulfill their own
personal moralities. Additionally, nobody would have the right to stop or condemn another, for
each person is responsible for their own moral foundations. However, he claims that
conventionalism, although not something he agrees with, would be a lesser of the two evils for
the community would have the power to set certain individuals straight that strayed from the
public. In my opinion, this argument is not valid, for conventionalism would lead to the same
conclusion, just on a much larger scale, with societies clashing against each other (as they
currently do).
For the sake of the length of this paper, I unfortunately cannot go into further detail of the
disagreements I have with Pojman’s arguments. However, I can say that he shined a light for me
in that I do not strictly believe in cultural relativism without any sense of objectivism, anymore. I
do believe that there needs to be some objective moral “rules” that comply with all cultures
across the board, and then issues of a lesser nature, should be distinguished culturally. We, in the
United States, have a similar system with the use of federal and states laws, as well as
Professor Galloway
08/31/2017
Response: The Case Against Moral Relativism
As a student of Anthropology, I have been taught from day one to not only understand
the theory cultural relativism, but to practice it continuously in my studies and everyday life.
Cultural relativism was something I very quickly agreed with, due to the nature of anthropology
and the need for it in my future research. I have even argued for it in the past with peers of mine,
as well as my parents and other professors. In fact, even after reading the article, The Case
Against Moral Relativism by Louis Pojman, I still believe it to be true, however not to the extent
that I previously had.
I want to lay out some issues I had with Pojman’s article. He explains that subjectivism
states that morality is dependent on the individual, instead of a society or culture, like
conventionalism is. He then goes on to claim that subjectivism is much worse than
conventionalism because each individual is responsible for their own moral grounds and
eventually it would lead to everybody clashing with one another, trying to fulfill their own
personal moralities. Additionally, nobody would have the right to stop or condemn another, for
each person is responsible for their own moral foundations. However, he claims that
conventionalism, although not something he agrees with, would be a lesser of the two evils for
the community would have the power to set certain individuals straight that strayed from the
public. In my opinion, this argument is not valid, for conventionalism would lead to the same
conclusion, just on a much larger scale, with societies clashing against each other (as they
currently do).
For the sake of the length of this paper, I unfortunately cannot go into further detail of the
disagreements I have with Pojman’s arguments. However, I can say that he shined a light for me
in that I do not strictly believe in cultural relativism without any sense of objectivism, anymore. I
do believe that there needs to be some objective moral “rules” that comply with all cultures
across the board, and then issues of a lesser nature, should be distinguished culturally. We, in the
United States, have a similar system with the use of federal and states laws, as well as
