YT YouTube2Text

YouTube2Text → Transcripts → Moral Relativism - Explained and Debated

Moral Relativism - Explained and Debated — Transcript

by Philosophy Vibe · 2,138 words · 409 segments · language en · Watch on YouTube

Open in transcriber Summarize with AI Download SRT/VTT

Full transcript

0:00[Music]
0:05hello and welcome to philosophy by the
0:08channel where we discuss and debate
0:09different philosophical ideas
0:11today we're going to be focusing on some
0:13ethics and looking into the theory of
0:15moral relativism
0:17excellent now moral relativism is quite
0:20a broad ethical theory that actually
0:22encompasses a number of different ideas
0:25however the fundamental and underlying
0:28principle of moral relativism
0:30is that there is no absolute universal
0:33or objective morality
0:35it does not exist instead morality is
0:38relative to a particular standpoint the
0:41truth of moral judgment
0:42is relative to a particular society or
0:45to a particular time period
0:47this stands in complete opposition to
0:50moral objectivism
0:51which claims there is such a thing as
0:53objective moral truths
0:55so four moral relativists when one makes
0:58a moral claim
1:00there is no universal or objective truth
1:02the truth or falsity of any moral claim
1:06is solely dependent and relative as to
1:08when
1:09where and who is saying it in this video
1:12we are going to look at why someone
1:14would develop a moral relativist
1:16position
1:16and john and i will look into the
1:18strengths of the theory as well as the
1:20challenges
1:21great let's get started okay so the
1:24beginnings of moral relativism
1:26start with descriptive relativism
1:29now descriptive relativism is the
1:31empirical
1:32awareness that there does exist fierce
1:35disagreements when it comes to morality
1:37this is clear-cut for everyone to see
1:40there are moral disagreements from
1:42culture to culture from time period to
1:44time period
1:45morality changes and the moral judgment
1:47you express
1:48in one continent or country or community
1:51can seem perfectly right
1:53but in another it is completely wrong
1:55yes i understand
1:57from there we get to cultural relativism
2:00very similar to descriptive relativism
2:02however it
2:03emphasizes that culture is the defining
2:06factor of moral judgments
2:08all our ethical beliefs practices
2:11actions
2:11everything we hold as moral these are
2:14all rooted
2:14in the culture we are brought up in and
2:17so all morality is completely and solely
2:20relative
2:21as to what culture it comes from for
2:23example
2:24monogamy is seen by some cultures as
2:26moral and the right thing to do
2:28and polygamy is seen as immoral whereas
2:31in other cultures
2:32polygamy is seen as completely fine and
2:35even encouraged
2:36contraception can be seen by some
2:38cultures as responsible
2:40and in others it can be seen as a sin
2:42the list goes on
2:43and in fact increases more when you look
2:46into cultures of different time periods
2:49infanticide slavery child marriages all
2:52of these things were completely
2:53acceptable once upon a time
2:55and now we see them as disgusting
2:58immoral evil acts
2:59this is because the morality of these
3:01things was completely relative
3:04to the culture and the time that they
3:06came from fascinating
3:08and from there this leads us to
3:10meta-ethical relativism
3:12because of descriptive and cultural
3:13relativism we then
3:15must agree that there is no absolute or
3:17universal truths to
3:19any moral claims the truth or falsity of
3:22moral judgments
3:23are solely dependent on the culture and
3:25the groups of people
3:26in that society we have no grounds for
3:30preferring one set of moral principles
3:32to another
3:33we have no grounds for saying one
3:35culture's practices or norms
3:36are better or worse than another as
3:39there is no universal moral truths
3:41there is no better or worse there is
3:44only different
3:45each culture each society will hold that
3:48their moral principles are right
3:50and in a way they are personally but in
3:52a way they are not
3:54as no one is objectively right or wrong
3:57the truth or falsity of any moral claim
4:00judgment or action
4:01is relative to that particular culture
4:04not to some universal or absolute truth
4:07yes this makes sense okay so now
4:10let's look at the strengths of moral
4:12relativism as an ethical
4:14theory first and foremost it perfectly
4:16explains
4:17why moral disagreements exist this
4:20problem has always been a huge
4:21issue for ethicists if there exists
4:24universal
4:25moral truths then why do people and
4:28cultures disagree so much
4:30why have philosophers struggle to find
4:32an ethical code
4:34that everyone agrees to why are there so
4:36many
4:37moral clashes surely objective morality
4:40would have been discovered by
4:42now surely all people would have been
4:44able to discover and agree to an
4:46absolute moral code
4:48moral objectivity seems unreachable
4:51and why is this the case the most
4:54straightforward and obvious answer
4:56is because it does not exist there is no
4:59such thing as
5:00moral objectivity there is no such thing
5:03as an absolute moral truth
5:05all we have is different cultures and
5:08societies
5:09with their own practices and their own
5:11norms this is all morality is
5:14just the behaviors of different cultures
5:16we do not have to stress about finding
5:18the moral truth
5:20or coming up with the universal
5:21behavioral formula
5:23as it does not exist i see
5:26furthermore moral relativism better
5:28explains the existence of cultural
5:31diversity
5:32if there was one correct way to act one
5:34correct set of moral principles
5:36then all cultures would more or less be
5:39the same
5:40but the fact we have such cultural
5:42diversity
5:43highlights that there is no universal
5:45moral code
5:46just cultural relativism interesting and
5:49finally
5:50moral relativism is the best ethical
5:52basis for cultural tolerance
5:55if we escape the outlook of seeing some
5:57cultures as right or wrong better or
5:59worse
6:00but just come to see them all as
6:01different then we are in a better
6:03position to be more tolerant
6:05we will learn to respect all cultures
6:07and practices and perhaps we can learn
6:09from one another
6:10great points you have raised but i see
6:12big problems for moral relativism as an
6:15ethical theory
6:16like what firstly i would argue that you
6:19are presupposing that the existence of
6:21objective morality
6:22would mean everyone would know the moral
6:24truth this is a mistake
6:27we can still very much have absolute
6:29moral truths yet just do not know or
6:31have not discovered these truths
6:33no i disagree here think about how far
6:35we have come as a human race how much we
6:37have discovered
6:38and still after all these years we are
6:41having moral disagreements
6:43this just highlights the fact that there
6:44is no objective moral truth
6:47i think that is a mistake there is so
6:49much we have not discovered yet as a
6:51human race
6:52i think it is a huge error to just
6:54assume we should have discovered moral
6:56truths by now
6:57and from there you were denying their
6:59existence altogether
7:01consider this people disagree about the
7:04origins of the human race
7:05even scientists can disagree about the
7:08origins of the human race
7:10just because there is disagreement does
7:12not mean there is no absolute truth
7:14as to the origins of the human species
7:17there is
7:18we have just not discovered it yet so
7:21just because there are moral
7:22disagreements does not in any way shape
7:25or form prove
7:26there are not universal moral truths
7:29there could very well be
7:30it's just that we have not discovered
7:32them yet i see
7:34furthermore i believe moral relativists
7:37exaggerate just how much cultures differ
7:39in terms of morality
7:41really come on i went through just a few
7:43differences in cultures but you know
7:46there are so many moral differences
7:47between cultures
7:48i understand there are moral differences
7:51but i am saying
7:52there are more moral similarities than
7:54differences
7:55like what i am pretty sure cold-blooded
7:58murder is wrong in near enough every
8:00culture
8:01theft torture of innocent people the
8:03list could go on
8:05if you use moral differences as proof of
8:07moral relativism
8:09then i could use moral similarities as
8:11proof of
8:12moral objectivism hmm a further
8:15objection
8:16would a moral relativist have to agree
8:19that obvious and blatant immoral acts
8:21that were once accepted
8:23should have in fact been tolerated would
8:26a moral relativist honestly say
8:28that slavery or infanticide as done in
8:31the past
8:32was in fact moral at the time well i
8:35think anyone looking at those actions
8:37from a modern perspective would agree
8:38that they are wrong but
8:40in another time yes they were accepted
8:42but even by today's standards
8:44suppose there was a specific culture
8:46that practiced forced labour
8:48the immoral relativist would have no
8:50reason to value one side who morally
8:52disagree
8:53over the other side who accept or
8:55promote it as you said
8:57according to moral relativists both
8:59cultures are no closer to objective
9:01truth
9:02both cultures are neither wrong or right
9:04just different
9:06so the moral relativists would remain
9:08apathetic
9:09to a culture that promotes slavery yes i
9:12see your point
9:13this then brings me to my other point
9:15moral relativism does not really take
9:18into account the disagreements
9:19within a culture it claims that morality
9:22is relative to culture
9:24but to find an entire society who are
9:27all homogenous when it comes to morality
9:30is very unlikely there are huge moral
9:32disagreements within specific cultures
9:35so how can moral statements be right or
9:38wrong relative to a culture
9:40if there is so much difference in
9:41diversity within a culture
9:44i think the fact that there is so much
9:46moral diversity within
9:47cultures further strengthens the idea
9:50that there is no
9:51objective moral truth and here we can
9:54take
9:54moral relativism further to the
9:56individual level
9:58and when we do find such diverse moral
10:00judgments
10:01we can lean on ethical subjectivism as a
10:04theory
10:05this theory claims that the truth or
10:08falsity of
10:09moral judgments depends solely on the
10:11attitudes of people
10:13so when a person expresses a moral
10:16opinion
10:16this is either true or false relative
10:20to that specific person's moral attitude
10:23this is moral relativism refined down to
10:26the individual
10:28i cannot agree with this moral truths
10:30will become
10:31so arbitrary this might as well become a
10:33moral skepticism theory
10:35how so if two people are looking at the
10:38same act at the same time
10:39one person says it is moral the other
10:42person says it is immoral
10:44according to ethical subjectivism both
10:46people are right
10:48yet they are saying two different things
10:50about the same event
10:51this makes no sense if two people stand
10:54in the same street at the same time
10:56one says it's raining the other states
10:59it's not raining
11:00only one can be right to say both are
11:02right is a contradiction
11:04and i feel the same way about the moral
11:06case too
11:07very good point there are problems with
11:09the moral relativist position but
11:11equally there are problems with the
11:13moral objectivist position
11:14how do we account for the moral
11:16disagreements and diversity
11:18this is still a huge problem i agree
11:21maybe it's not as simple as every
11:23possible moral judgment is objectively
11:25true or false
11:26or relative maybe morality is a blend
11:29between
11:30moral objectivism and moral relativism
11:33explain
11:34i would argue that there are fundamental
11:36objective moral truths
11:38these are the promotion and protection
11:40of life
11:41freedom and happiness and the
11:43minimization or outright elimination
11:46of pain and suffering these are
11:48objective moral truths
11:50you can say they have come from god but
11:52it would be easier to just say they are
11:54innate evolutionary desires based on our
11:56human reality
11:58now based off of these objective moral
12:00truths
12:01we develop our behaviors as to how we
12:04can promote
12:05life freedom and happiness and eliminate
12:07pain and suffering
12:09it is these behaviors that become
12:11relative
12:12to cultures and time periods and
12:14individuals
12:15so for example cold-blooded murder is
12:18wrong
12:19that is an objective moral fact because
12:21it goes against the promotion of life
12:23and the elimination of pain every
12:26sound-minded person would agree with
12:27that
12:28that's easy but let's look at say
12:31arranged marriages one culture may
12:34believe that arranged marriages promote
12:36happiness as
12:38suitable partners are picked with ease
12:40whereas another culture would disagree
12:43and see arranged marriages as going
12:45against one's freedom
12:46and increasing emotional pain here is
12:49where the morality becomes relative
12:52so ultimately there are objective moral
12:55truths
12:56but in reaching these truths our moral
12:59behavior
13:00can be considered relative very good
13:02point
13:03if you would like the script to this
13:05video it is part of the philosophy vibe
13:07ethics ebook available on amazon this
13:10will be a great help for anyone studying
13:12ethics
13:13also if you want to support this channel
13:15please check out our merch store on
13:17teespring
13:17some great philosophy themed hoodies
13:19t-shirts mugs and more
13:21all purchases really help out this
13:23channel but that's all the time we have
13:25for now
13:25thank you for watching we hope you
13:27enjoyed the vibe and what does everyone
13:28else think
13:29who out there is a moral relativist and
13:31how best would you defend your moral
13:33position
13:34let us know in the comments below don't
13:36forget to like and share
13:37and for more philosophical debates
13:39please subscribe to the channel
13:40take care and we look forward to seeing
13:42you all soon bye

About this transcript

This page contains the full transcript of Moral Relativism - Explained and Debated by Philosophy Vibe, generated from the public captions YouTube serves with the video. The transcript has 2,138 words across 409 segments, with the original timestamps preserved so you can click any line to jump to that moment in the embedded player.

What you can do with it

Use the transcript to take notes, quote the speaker, build a study guide, generate a summary with ChatGPT or Claude via the YouTube Summary tool, or export it as a timed subtitle file with YouTube to SRT. You can also re-open it in the transcriber to translate the transcript into 100+ languages.

Free YouTube transcript tool

YouTube2Text is a free YouTube transcript generator — no signup, no daily limit. Paste any YouTube link and get the full transcript instantly, with timestamps, click-to-jump, translation to 100+ languages, AI prompts for ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini, and exports to TXT, SRT, VTT, or Markdown.