Moral Relativity

The moral relativists view is not paradoxical when showing tolerance to other cultures morality, and does not direct a person to adopt the universal or absolute standard because moral relativists believe that there is no single true morality, but a possibility of a variety of morality. According to the Wikepedia encyclopedia, moral relativism is the position that moral propositions do not reflect absolute or universal truths, but instead are relative to social, cultural, historical or personal references, and that there is no single standard by which to assess a moral proposition's truth. If the understanding of a moral relativist is based on social and cultural influence then there is an understanding of the possibility of cultural induced moral differences.

I don't think that a moral relativist is contradicting when showing tolerance to other cultures morality because a moral relativists believe that the correct morality is relative to one's society. By this it implies that all societies or cultures are different and may hold different customs or views in that area. We may not agree with the different customs or beliefs of others, but being tolerable is not adopting universal or absolute standards. If we don't agree with someone's customs or beliefs, and they do not personally harm anyone, that doesn't mean you have to do as they do. Our own moral background determines how we see other people. If we didn't have this background, we wouldn't have the framework to appreciate or criticize. A good example from the video was when they showed a family in a third world country shooting a tube into the cows neck to drain the blood for the children to drink for nutrients. Some people may see this as cruel to the animal and disgusting to drink cows blood. The video illustrates that this act to them is no different then us drinking cows milk or slaughtering animals. I think being tolerable is not adopting a universal