Ethical Relativism

Ethical Relativism is the view that advances that some moral rules really are correct, and that these determine which moral claims are true and which are false. For the ethical relatvist these standards are never objectively correct, rather, these standards are relative to each person, or each society. Thus, a moral standard is correct just because a person, or society is deeply committed to it. This means that the standards that are appropriate for some people may not be appropriate for others. Thus, morality is a human construct. In other words, we make it up.
The other day, I was reading the following article: http://www.nytimes.com/1994/09/13/opinion/l-different-cultures-have-different-values-227889.htmlThe author discusses the notion of different cultures having different values. The author discusses the Chinese culture and values and how they differ from American culture and values. More specifically he delves into the topic of meats. He ponders why it is such an issue for American's that the Chinese eat dog meat. He wonders why one culture would consider themselves more civilized based on the kind of meat they eat. He goes further to say "I am not ashamed of eating dog. I have a different color of skin, I speak a different language and I come from a different cultural background, so I sometimes eat different food (meat in this case) too." He ends his article with what to me, were truly powerful words: "In today's world, linked by common interest, it is perhaps wise and beneficial not to impose our own values on others." He displayed the views of an ethical relativist. And to be frank, his view seemed to make a lot of sense. It seems that people, and even societies ought to not be judged or chastised for  having a different value than the next person. By the ethical relativists view, however, it is okay for people to disagree and find the views of the next person or society inappropriate. This article is interesting because it seems to highlight a problem the ethical relativists deal with. That is, of embracing the notion that standards are never objectively correct, rather, these standards are relative to each person, or each society and yet being accepting to notion of the next person or society disagreeing with one's held standards/values.