Final answer:
The correct answer is option (2). Customs and conventions are often in opposition to moral relativism, which suggests that moral judgments are specific to cultural contexts and not universally applicable. Philosophies like moral realism argue against moral relativism by positing that there are objective moral truths that transcend cultural norms.
Step-by-step explanation:
Which of the following is often in opposition to moral relativism? The answer is customs and conventions. This question explores the tension between moral relativism and various ethical principles and beliefs.
Moral relativism is the view that moral judgments and values are relative to specific cultural contexts, suggesting there is no single universal moral standard. This position can be in conflict with a more universalist or objectivist view like that offered by moral realism.
Customs and conventions, along with cultural mores, represent the social norms and shared behaviors within specific societies. These can be reflective of descriptive ethical relativism, which observes that moral perspectives vary across cultures.
However, moral relativism as a normative theory, suggests that these varying beliefs are all equally valid, which can be directly opposed by philosophies that propose universal moral truths, such as natural law theory or moral realism. Moral realism posits that objective moral truths exist outside of individual cultural perspectives, challenging the core of moral relativism.
Moral reforms and criticisms of local customs by minorities or external observers often run counter to moral relativism, reflecting the belief in universal moral principles which should apply across cultural boundaries.
For example, certain acts like female infanticide or genital mutilation are condemned universally despite being part of some local traditions, indicating that some moral areas may give rise to agreement beyond cultural specifics.
Moral skepticism, another opposition to moral relativism, takes a different approach by questioning the existence of objective moral values altogether. In contrast, natural law theory and moral realism argue for objective ethical principles that stand independent of cultural differences, often appealing to nature or some form of rational moral order as the foundation.