According to the definition of https://123helpme.org/  elativism is the methodological principle of moral nature interpretation, underlying in ethical theories. The philosophical idea of what is right, wrong, good, and bad are not absolute, but variable with respect to the categories, depending on the particular circumstances, a person or social situation. Claiming categorically that truth does not exist; people begin to exclude the possibility of knowing the truth, if it exists at all. In this regard, in contemporary America, moral relativism is hiding behind the majority of beautiful words about morality.

There is a number of arguments in defense of moral relativism. Two of them are particularly popular; they again appear in various forms in our society. The first argument states that since the culture of behavior in individual nations and different personalities are different, there is no objective system of moral values. This argument could cause several objections.

First, the fact that people do not agree with each other on something, does not mean that there is no objective truth. However, it should be noted that the presence of some common values to all people and nations ??does not mean that all the values ??are the same for all nations. Obviously, some people may have some values that are absent in others. Consequently, some people have the values inherent only to them. It does not contradict the basic thesis that there are basic values directly or indirectly followed all nations.

The second argument in favor of ethical relativism states that ethical relativism promotes tolerance towards certain cultural forms of behavior that Westerners may consider strange, and, therefore, ethical relativism is a good thing. However, although tolerance is a virtue, proponents of ethical relativism simply cannot justify its position on this principle. First, the virtue of tolerance (moral value) implies the existence of at least one real objective value: tolerance.

Socrates saw his task to pave the way for such knowledge, which is superior to a simple proposition, in order to identify such a morality that would exceed the simple setting. Socrates believed that perhaps the true knowledge has not yet been reached. For him, the awareness of ignorance meant more a beginning than the end of the philosophical search. Thanks to this realization, it becomes possible to overcome the conventional notions that only obscure the true nature of man. Socrates believed that only through self-knowledge, through comprehension of one’s own soul, it is possible to find the true knowledge. He reasoned that if a person knows what a true blessing is, it is beneficial for him/ her in the deepest sense - then, of course, he/ she would do good deeds. Virtue is knowledge, truly happy life - a life filled with righteous actions committed under the influence of the mind. Thus, it is important that these particular truths be sought because the key to human happiness is a reasonable moral behavior.

Siddhartha Gautama followed the principle of total relativism: each object (process) is a Dharma, constantly changing and evolving because of other objects (processes) and influencing others. It is important that these particular truths be sought because the human soul is no more than a chain of Dharma. Death of a person is not complete disappearance, but the recombination of Dharma from one’s previous life in a new way of any living creature. The right knowledge gives a true understanding of suffering, which is a continuous transformation of Dharma, their excitement, substantiates impermanence human conditions. Achieved through trance meditation Nirvana is the highest possible state of a person when he calms down from the excitement of one’s life.

Thus, many people today take the position of moral relativism in the United States. They believe that there is no objective moral value ??system, which helps determine what is right and what is not. They claim that everything is relative. To defend this position, they put forward their arguments of relativists. These arguments have been seriously flawed.