Compare And Contrast Ethical Relativism And Soft Universalism

How to deal with moral differences varies on the perspective at hand. Dealing with the clash that has surfaced between the western value of freedom of the press and the sacredness of the Muslim religion is a prominent issue currently in society. An ethical relativist does not believe in a universal moral truth, but instead that the morals at hand, revolve around the culture, especially the specific “time and place”. Whereas a soft universalist believes in the idea of a few universal moral truths existing. In short, the main goal of soft universalism is to “seek common ground beneath the variety of opinions and mores” (Rosenstand, 2013, p.122-123). A culture has the right to create its own rules to follow as well as moral truths. Since it is up to the culture to decide what is right for themselves, no one else has the right to dictate what is right or wrong with their rules. All of their laws and values are held true and right for the time and …show more content…
Ethical relativism states that there is a moral code within specific cultures, which I believe to be true. On the other hand soft universalism suggests that there are some universal moral truths that could be used to aid in cross-cultural moral conflicts. Both of these ideas revolving around moral truths can be correct on one level and questionable on other levels. Personally, I believe it is more realistic to say we fall under the label of cultural tolerance mixed with the ideas behind soft universalism rather than the ideas behind ethical relativism around the world today. This is because as a human race we try to keep the peace and understand other people’s reasons for their actions. Not all cultures share the same practices or beliefs, but the foundation of humanity is the same. Like James Rachels states, “Each culture retains its own unique flavor while being able to meld with the other ingredients of the salad” (Gunning,