The implausibility of the opinion of non-Christian students about the relativity of ethical beliefs is confirmed by its subjectivity, the correctness of each ethical belief, and the impossibility of their criticism. To refute the opinion of non-Christian students, it is necessary to turn to the theory of ethical subjectivism. Objective claims have two distinguishing features. First, they are not a simple expression of tastes, desires, and opinions. Second, they have an absolute truth value. Thus, non-Christian students’ view on the relativity of ethical beliefs is subjective. This opinion of non-Christian students is as subjective as the moral beliefs of Christians are personal. Moreover, according to the theory of ethical subjectivism, people are always right when they make ethical judgments since they express their position based on their feelings. Accordingly, since it is impossible to be mistaken in one’s feelings, every ethical statement is true. Thus, the opinion of Christians about their correctness cannot be questioned since they express their faith and conviction.
The opinion of non-Christian students can be refuted from the standpoint of ethical relativism. This value paradigm is based on tolerance and pluralism. Nash notes that, according to this theory, no moral code can be better than another (345). Respectively, people have no reason to criticize people with other beliefs due to the lack of a moral absolute. It follows that non-Christian students cannot be more right than Christians. Thus, the opinion of non-Christian students about the relativity of ethical beliefs can be refuted based on such approaches to ethics as ethical subjectivism and ethical relativism.
Works Cited
Nash, Ronald H. Life’s Ultimate Questions: An Introduction to Philosophy. Zondervan, 1999