Research Paper on:
Ethical Relativism in a Critical Eye

Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
any universal explanation virtually impossible. The problem with meaning as it applies to ethical relativism is attempting to successfully pinpoint a single yet comprehensive connotation to its concept; however,  this cannot be achieved as long as any two individuals harbor decidedly different interpretations. It is important for the student to understand that there exist a great many philosophies  by which people live their lives. These philosophies help maintain order and a sense of direction that otherwise would merely drift in subconscious thought, which also helps to apply  a modicum of understanding to the concept of meaning. One of these fundamental principles is that of ethical relativism, which provides the concepts of how people incorporate ethical occurrences  throughout their daily existence. Indeed, the issues behind ethics and morality are critical to defining what meaning truly represents. Of those who have addressed these concepts, Michele Moody-Adams,  Gilbert Harman, David Wong and John L. Mackie stand out as being most intimately associated. In order to establish whether or not ethical relativism truly exists within the confines of  society, it is critical to understand the concepts behind both ethical relativism and ethical objectivism, one of the primary grounds upon which people critique ethical relativism. These philosophical ideals  are what make us the morally minded creatures we strive to be, although their principles are often overlooked or misconstrued. To delve into the concept of ethical relativism is  to examine the wide and varying societal rules that bind one to ones cultural existence. There is no universally accepted mode of ethical behavior; what is acceptable for Americans  may be deemed inappropriate for another society halfway around the world. Cannibalism may be a perfectly moral and ethical way of life for some ancient tribes, but it is