What does moral relativism mean?

Definition and Scope of Moral Relativism

Moral relativism is the view that ethical standards and principles are not absolute but are determined by cultural context, personal preferences, or circumstances. This perspective holds that what one society or individual deems morally correct may differ from another, and no overarching moral code can judge one viewpoint to be universally right or wrong. As such, moral relativism argues that truth is fluid and changes based on context, rather than being anchored in a consistent, unchangeable source.

Moral relativism has been discussed in diverse fields, including philosophy, anthropology, and psychology. In these discussions, the concept often arises as an attempt to explain the wide variety of moral customs and beliefs present throughout history and across different societies.

Historical and Cultural Expressions

Throughout recorded history, there have been variations in moral guidelines from one culture to another. Sociological studies highlight differences in practices associated with head coverings, dietary rules, or societal norms, leading some to conclude that morality must be relative. Notable philosophers—such as some ancient Greek sophists—posed that whenever a person or society deems something just, it becomes so, reinforcing the idea that moral standards vary.

Archaeological research in various ancient societies (including Egyptian, Babylonian, and Roman) has uncovered artifacts and texts revealing moral codes that differ in application. However, these same artifacts also exhibit consistent underlying values, such as prohibitions against murder and theft. This interplay of differences in cultural expression vs. foundational moral similarities forms part of the discussion on whether certain moral standards transcend cultural context.

Biblical Perspective on Moral Relativism

Scriptural teaching emphasizes a moral law that is rooted in the unchanging character of God. According to the Bible, the same divine authority that created the universe also established a moral order. The following passages illustrate this principle:

• Romans 2:14–15: “Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law, since they show that the work of the law is written on their hearts…” This indicates that a universal moral compass exists within humanity, regardless of cultural boundaries.

• Proverbs 14:34: “Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a disgrace to any people.” This verse underscores that moral distinctions are not subjective; right and wrong have concrete outcomes on both individuals and societies.

The overall Scriptural narrative consistently reveals that true morality—an unchanging moral framework—flows from the Creator. Historical accounts in the Old Testament, the Gospels, and the letters to the early Church reflect this continuity. Archaeological finds, such as the Dead Sea Scrolls, confirm the preservation of biblical moral injunctions over centuries. Their consistent transmission underscores the durable, objective nature of the standards presented in the texts.

Philosophical Considerations

1. Objective vs. Subjective Morality

Moral relativism asserts a subjective viewpoint: it depends on societal consensus or personal conviction. By contrast, the biblical worldview affirms that certain truths are valid universally because they stem from a higher authority than mere human opinion.

2. Accountability and Justice

Under relativism, there is no overarching moral authority to hold individuals or societies accountable for wrongdoing. Yet, Scripture teaches that God’s inherent justice presides over every deed (cf. Ecclesiastes 12:14). Without objective moral law, the concept of ultimate justice becomes inconsistent.

3. Human Conscience

Many behavioral scientists and philosophers note that people from differing cultural backgrounds often share core moral intuitions, such as the wrongness of intentional harm to innocent persons. This convergence challenges the premise that morality is only relative and instead suggests a universal moral sense woven into the human conscience.

Societal Implications

When moral relativism becomes prevalent, some societal outcomes emerge:

• Moral Ambiguity: Without a foundation, moral decisions may be guided purely by majority opinion or convenience.

• Erosion of Accountability: If right and wrong are fluid, accountability weakens, and individuals may rationalize unethical behavior.

• Loss of Common Ground: Debates over policies and justice can devolve if no shared standard exists for settling moral questions.

Historically, periods of cultural upheaval have often coincided with moral confusion when absolute standards are abandoned. Conversely, times of reform and renewal correlate with societies reclaiming or rediscovering a consistent moral foundation.

Clarifications in Light of Biblical Teaching

1. Absolute Moral Law

Scripture consistently presents moral commands—such as those found in the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20)—as absolute, reflecting the holy and just character of God.

2. Cultural Expressions vs. Core Morality

Cultures express moral principles differently, but central biblical mandates, including the call to love God and love one’s neighbor (cf. Matthew 22:37–39), span all environments, demonstrating a moral clarity that transcends time and geography.

3. Human Limitation and Divine Revelation

Individuals and cultures sometimes err or shift morally because of human limitations and the influence of various social pressures. Scripture teaches that divine revelation serves as the grounding reference, guiding believers to a stable point of moral truth, not subject to cultural vacillation.

Practical Reflections

• Acknowledging objective moral truth can lead to greater personal integrity, since actions and decisions rest on a firm standard rather than changing opinions.

• Recognizing moral absolutes fosters empathy and strong community ties, as it nurtures respect for life, honesty, and justice in social structures.

• Aligning oneself with biblical morality involves daily discernment, understanding that the core moral law undergirds righteous living and societal well-being.

Conclusion

Moral relativism, while observing cultural differences in ethics, falls short of providing a stable foundation for right and wrong. From the standpoint of Scripture, an unwavering moral code exists, stemming from the eternal character of the One who created all things. Historical, philosophical, and behavioral evidence aligns with the recognition that humanity shares an underlying moral consciousness.

In every age, the call remains to discern and follow the standard that does not change, reflecting the Creator’s own nature. As illustrated by biblical accounts, manuscript preservation, and human conscience, the moral order endures, providing clarity in a world that often embraces flux and subjectivity.