Module 1, Discussion 4, Chapter 2: Subjective Relativism

No unread replies.No replies.

Module 2, Discussion 2:

Please discuss the topic Subjective Relativism which is an epistemological issue. Question: What’s wrong with being a subjective relativist, in your view?

Please read the chapter two information on subjective relativism and watch the video. Attached you will find some additional information on this topic that addresses the related Ethical Relativism issue. Be sure to understand the distinction between them. We will return to this topic later on in Chapter 11.Create your post and respond to two classmates.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=518FR6SbY_k

POST 1

Subjective relativism is the action of something being approved by one person, but it may be disapproved by another. Not everyone will agree and approve of behavior at the same time, at the space place. Every person has their own beliefs and morality of what they believe is right. We can not impose what we believe on what others believe in. Each individual has a different morality and most do not have the same rightness from wrong actions. For example, in the video, the speaker states, ” people say everything is relative, even truth…” This inference is wrong because truth to an individual might not be true for another.

In my opinion, it is not best to be a subjective relativist because every individual has their own beliefs and what they think is right or wrong. Not everyone is going to like being told something is one way or the other. Something I feel is right of doing; another individual might find it is a bad idea.

POST 2

Subjective Relativism

Subjective relativism refers to the view that a given act is morally acceptable if someone approves it to be correct. In a philosophical context, it declares that a person has authority over their moral life. Every individual is said to be the source of their moral principles in life (Merlo & Pravato, 2020). In this reasoning, people have the right to decide on what they view as wrong or right.

In subject relativism, an act can either be right or wrong. Therefore, it means action can be right for a particular person but be wrong for another person. Individuals who believe in subject relativism justify this by different mechanisms (Merlo & Pravato, 2020). They argue that the constitution entitles them to freedom. It entails the freedom of conscience. All individuals have the right to think and make a reasonable conclusion on ethical and social issues without anyone objecting to them to do so.

In my view, relativists are wrong as the wrongness or rightness of a situation is determined by a person or individual cultures. Relativists do not believe in making errors because they conclude their moral rightness or wrongness based on their opinions. As a result, individuals contrast in moral opinions to those put in place by society. Therefore, they oppose moral absoluteness. Some actions may be regarded as ethically right in particular cultures, and they may be ethically wrong in others. Individuals are left to decide on their moral life and moral principles regardless of what some cultures dictate. Such individuals may justify actions seen as inhuman by some communities, but they are okay with the actions. In my opinion, good morals will exist only in societies that allow a breed of many cultures in place to determine the rightness or wrongness of a situation.