Moral realism holds that objective moral truths exist

Moral realism claims all morality is purely emotional

Moral realism says nothing can be known about morality

Moral realism denies any relationship between fact and value

Descriptive relativism observes that moral codes differ across cultures

Descriptive relativism teaches that only one moral code is correct

Descriptive relativism requires every culture to be tolerant

Descriptive relativism denies that morals can ever change

Metaethical relativism says moral truths are true or false only relative to a culture

Metaethical relativism means we should all adopt one universal moral code

Metaethical relativism says morality never changes

Metaethical relativism proves moral statements are meaningless

Normative relativism claims no culture should judge another’s moral code

Normative relativism is the same as descriptive relativism

Normative relativism insists tolerance is never required

Normative relativism says morality is based only on emotions

Subjectivism bases morality on each individual's perspective

Subjectivism insists on culture-wide consensus

Subjectivism treats all moral statements as scientific hypotheses

Subjectivism is another name for moral realism

A main objection to relativism is that it makes moral progress impossible

Relativism guarantees that every culture is improving morally

Relativism proves that all moral disagreements are trivial

Relativism requires everyone to adopt one global code

Mackie’s argument from relativity highlights persistent moral disagreement

Mackie’s argument proves moral laws are created by governments

Mackie’s argument says morality is only about emotions

Mackie’s argument denies that cultures ever disagree

Emotivism treats moral statements as expressions of emotion

Emotivism views moral claims as factual reports

Emotivism is identical to moral realism

Emotivism denies that emotions play any role in ethics

Prescriptivism sees moral statements as universal prescriptions for action

Prescriptivism says moral claims are only historical facts

Prescriptivism rejects all universal language

Prescriptivism and emotivism are identical

Hume’s fork suggests moral truths are neither purely logical nor purely empirical

Hume’s fork proves morality is entirely subjective

Hume’s fork combines facts and morals into one discovery method

Hume’s fork demonstrates morality is deducible by science

Bridging the “is–ought” gap is hard because facts don’t automatically imply duties

Bridging the gap is easy because facts and morals are identical

Bridging the gap shows that all moral rules come from government

Bridging the gap is only a problem for religious ethics

Moral anti-realism denies the existence of objective, mind-independent moral facts

Moral anti-realism claims moral truths are eternal and unchanging

Moral anti-realism insists every culture has the same morality

Moral anti-realism defines morality purely in legal terms

Cultural relativism teaches that moral truth can be true relative to a culture

Cultural relativism insists there is only one universal moral code

Cultural relativism says morality depends only on individual feelings

Cultural relativism rejects the influence of culture on morals

An example of absolute cultural relativism is uncritical acceptance of female genital cutting

Absolute cultural relativism condemns all cultural practices equally

Absolute cultural relativism enforces global human-rights laws

Absolute cultural relativism forbids all traditional rituals

Critical cultural relativism allows evaluation of practices using human-rights standards

Critical cultural relativism prohibits moral criticism of any practice

Critical cultural relativism ignores human rights completely

Critical cultural relativism assumes one culture is supreme

Objectivism in ethics holds that moral truths are discovered, not invented

Objectivism says morals are created by each government

Objectivism reduces morality to personal taste

Objectivism claims moral statements are meaningless

Ayn Rand’s Objectivism rejects altruism and supports rational self-interest

Objectivism insists self-sacrifice is the highest virtue

Objectivism bases morality on collective feelings

Objectivism says reason cannot be trusted

According to Rand, the three supreme values are Reason, Purpose, and Self-esteem

According to Rand, the three supreme values are Faith, Hope, and Charity

According to Rand, the three supreme values are Love, Duty, and Sacrifice

According to Rand, the three supreme values are Law, Order, and Equality

One criticism of relativism is that it cannot account for obvious evils like slavery or genocide

Relativism proves these evils are impossible

Relativism insists everyone already agrees on these issues

Relativism shows these practices are universally outlawed

The “problem of moral diversity” is that cultures have different moral codes

The problem of moral diversity is that all cultures are morally identical

The problem of moral diversity means everyone agrees on moral truths

The problem of moral diversity proves all morals are purely logical

One realist response to moral diversity is that disagreements may be due to factual, not moral, differences

Realists respond by conceding there are no moral truths

Realists argue morality is meaningless

Realists insist everyone already agrees morally

Tolerance is sometimes given as a reason to accept relativism, but critics say this assumes a universal value

Tolerance proves relativism is objectively true

Tolerance requires everyone to agree on every issue

Tolerance eliminates all moral conflicts

According to relativism, moral change like abolishing slavery is only a change, not necessarily progress

Relativism says abolition proves objective morality

Relativism teaches all social reforms are morally superior

Relativism demands constant moral change

Objectivists argue moral truths exist like mathematical truths—independent of opinions

Objectivists say morals depend entirely on government votes

Objectivists believe moral truths change with feelings

Objectivists reject all comparison to mathematics

Metaethical study helps clarify how to justify ethical principles even if it feels abstract

Metaethical study focuses on giving step-by-step legal codes

Metaethical study is only about religious ethics

Metaethical study is purely political strategy