Читать книгу Environmental Ethics онлайн
54 страница из 125
The case with moral relativism is more difficult. Moral relativism is a logical consequence of the moral anti-realists. These individuals contend that there is no science of the right and wrong in human action because there are no real moral objects at all.16 For the moral relativist all prescriptions about normative right or wrong are merely social constructions that have arbitrarily occurred via accidents in human history. Thus, when we say that “Action x is right in society y” we are only giving a factual, anthropological report. We are not saying anything universal about the human condition. This is because universal generalizations are the outputs of science only and describe things that really are (ontological objects). Since the moral anti-realists deny the efficacy of the moral realist scenario, it would be possible to give an anthropological report of murder and the shrinking of heads in some society and stop right there. No one in another anthropological tradition could call it wrong except as an expression of cultural imperialism. From this vantage point, global ethics would translate into merely an inevitable power play to impose the values of one culture over another. This results in ethical relativism.