Moral Relativism Explained
Gilbert Harman
1 What Is Moral Relativism?
According to moral relativism, there is not a single true morality. There are a variety of possible
moralities or moral frames of reference, and whether something is morally right or wrong, good
or bad, just or unjust, etc. is a relative matter—relative to one or another morality or moral
frame of reference. Something can be morally right relative to one moral frame of reference and
morally wrong relative to another.1 It is useful to compare moral relativism to other kinds of
relativism. One possible comparison is with motion relativism.2 There is no such thing as
absolute motion or absolute rest. Whether something is moving or at rest is relative to a spatio-
temporal frame of reference. Something may be at rest in one such frame of reference and
moving in another. There is no such thing as absolute motion and absolute rest, but we can
make do with relative motion and rest. Similarly, moral relativism is the view that, although
there is no such thing as absolute right and wrong, we can make do with relative right and
wrong.
Paul Boghossian suggests a different comparison.3 When people decided that there were no
witches and no such thing as witchcraft, they did not become relativists about witches; they
gave up their beliefs about witches. It would have been a mistake for them to conclude that
witchcraft is a relative matter, so that someone could be a witch in relation to one witch
framework but not in relation to another. An individual might be believed to be a witch by
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
1 I believe that this type of relativism is different from the very interesting type discussed by Carol
Rovane, e.g. in “Relativism Requires Alternatives, Not Disagreement or Relative Truth.”
2 Gilbert Harman: “Moral Relativism,” pp. 3-5.
3 E.g., Paul Boghossian, “The Maze of Moral Relativism.”
