(May 25, 2021 at 11:57 am)The Grand Nudger Wrote: The conclusion provided may be a nonseq, but I think it misrepresents relativism. It's not a relativist argument so much as the statement that descriptive relativism is true followed by the conclusion that relativism is not objectivism, therefore subjectivism, imo.
To be fair to cultural relativism we should probably respect the distinction between the opinions of a subject and facts of a culture in which that subject resides, and acknowledge that objectivism, relativism and subjectivism all make assertions to truth-in-general, that a moral claim can be true or false and at least some are.
I'm sure there are more refined theories out there. I'm not opposed to giving them a looking over.
But (if I'm being honest) that was more or less the argument that sold me on relativism years ago. And I'm sure others have reached the conclusion based on that premise. So Rachels is right to address it. Before that passage, he does present relativism quite charatably. And that was only his first argument.
