How does subjective relativism imply moral infallibility?
The correct answer and explanation is :
Correct Answer: Subjective relativism implies moral infallibility because it asserts that moral judgments are based on individual preferences, meaning that no one’s moral viewpoint can be wrong.
Explanation:
Subjective relativism is a philosophical view that holds that moral judgments are based on individual perspectives, feelings, or experiences. According to this theory, what is considered “right” or “wrong” varies from person to person and is determined by each individual’s beliefs or preferences. Essentially, moral values are not objective truths, but are shaped by personal opinions, cultural background, or personal experiences.
One of the key implications of subjective relativism is moral infallibility. In the context of this theory, moral infallibility means that an individual can never be wrong in their moral judgments because their judgments are based solely on their own views and beliefs. If morality is determined by the individual, then whatever an individual believes to be morally right or wrong is correct for that person. As a result, there is no objective standard by which one person’s moral viewpoint can be judged as incorrect.
For example, if someone believes that lying is morally acceptable in certain situations, under subjective relativism, that belief is valid for them. If another person disagrees and believes lying is always wrong, that belief is also valid, as it reflects their personal moral perspective. Neither individual is wrong because each person’s viewpoint is shaped by their own experiences and values.
This leads to the conclusion that, in the framework of subjective relativism, moral judgments cannot be subject to external criticism or correction. Since morality is inherently personal and subjective, each individual’s perspective is inherently “correct” for them, making moral mistakes or errors impossible under this view.
Critics of subjective relativism argue that this approach undermines the possibility of moral progress or universal moral standards, as it prevents people from engaging in moral discussions that could lead to more objective or universally accepted moral conclusions.