– Generated by Google AI – Added Text –
Explain the differences between Universalist and Relativist philosophies
Universalist philosophies hold that there are objective, universal truths and ethical principles that apply to all people, regardless of their cultural, social, or individual differences
In contrast, relativist philosophies contend that truth, knowledge, and morality are not absolute but are relative to particular frameworks, such as a culture or historical period.
Universalism
Universalism is the idea that some concepts have universal application. Its core claims include:
- Universal truths: Certain facts and principles apply to everyone, everywhere.
- Moral objectivism: A meta-ethical position that a single ethical system applies to all individuals. Not all forms of moral Universalism are absolutist, but they oppose moral relativism.
- Transcultural principles: Universalist arguments often appeal to a shared human condition or reason, asserting that a set of ethical standards can be applied across different cultural contexts. A key example is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Example of Universalism
In ethical Universalism, an act like murder would be considered universally wrong. A Universalist would argue that killing another human being is wrong regardless of cultural context or individual beliefs, and this moral truth applies to all people.
Relativism
Relativism denies claims of absolute, objective truth and instead asserts that values are relative to the observer or context. It has several forms:
- Moral relativism: The view that moral judgments vary by culture and individual preference, meaning there are no universal moral truths.
- Cultural relativism: The idea that a person’s beliefs and practices should be understood based on their own culture rather than be judged against the criteria of another.
- Epistemic relativism: The belief that there are no absolute principles of knowledge or rationality. What counts as justified belief is relative to a particular epistemic system or cultural framework.
Example of relativism
A moral relativist would argue that the “moral rightness” of a cultural practice, such as historical customs around marriage, is judged only by the standards of that culture. It is incorrect to judge the morals of one society using the standards of another.
Comparison of Universalism and Relativism
| Feature | Universalism | Relativism |
| Source of truth | Objective truths and values exist independently of individual or cultural viewpoints. | Truth and value are dependent on specific contexts like culture, historical epoch, or individual perspective. |
| Approach to morality | Believes a single system of ethics applies to all people, regardless of background. | Holds that moral principles are not absolute and can vary significantly across cultures and individuals. |
| Handling disagreements | Assumes that with enough information and reason, disagreements can be resolved because there is an objective truth to uncover. | Often sees disagreements as intractable because the conflicting positions can both be “true” from different, equally valid perspectives. |
| Implications for justice | Provides a basis for international human rights by asserting fundamental, universal standards of conduct. | Faces criticism for potentially justifying harmful practices if they are culturally accepted, though most relativists advocate for respect and tolerance. |
| Perspective on diversity | Acknowledges cultural differences but holds that certain core values or principles transcend them. | Views diversity in beliefs, norms, and values as evidence that no single standard is universally correct. |