The Challenge of Cultural Relativism

In many ways, the paces we've be.cn put through here ;,~.re entirely typical of philosophical disc:ussion. Perhaps most typical is the state of play at the end of the day. Rarely do philosophers have k."lock.down arguments that can eliminate a philosophical position from contenlli>n. Philosophical evaluation is ordinarily a matter of weighing the pros and cons of competing theories, and tentatively opting fbr one vle.w over another. T4stifY'..ng a phi!nsoph.i· cal view requires advancing positive argu:nen!.s on its behalf, and deflecting criticis.-m that detractors have identified. One needn't worry about getting bored. There v..ill always be detractors. Criticisms are never in short supply, Thus when we come to assess the merits of ethit.:al subjectivism, in either of irs major forms, we are engaged in a process of judgment. We examine the argumentli in support of the theory, develop thetn a;:, besl we can, and then scrutinize the tmpEcnions of adoptio:t, Whether we tan five with the implicatiom depends on one's assessment of the theory's urractions, and those of its competitors. There is no neat, simple method for discharglng this tas&: Whether we can Jive with moral equivalence, arbitrariness\ and the impossibility of moral knowledge depends on whether we can de, better elsewhere. A.td that depends on how well ethical objectivists c.m respond to the motivating arguments of previous secrions. Subjc;::tivism's prospectS may be bright (or dim f. But \\'e can mea· sure its incandes;::ence (lnJy after a very great deal of further philosophical labor.