Final answer:
True, The claim that all ethical standards are relative, known as normative ethical relativism, asserts that there are no absolute moral standards. While ethical standards do vary among cultures, there's debate over whether there can be any universal principles, and philosophers have sought to find a middle ground between absolutism and relativism.
Step-by-step explanation:
The statement 'All ethical standards are relative and should be treated as such.' is a perspective known as normative ethical relativism. This philosophical position argues that moral rightness and wrongness vary from society to society and that no universal moral standards are universally applicable. However, this is a complex issue with significant debate among scholars. Philosophical alternatives to relativism have been explored, with thinkers seeking a basis for morality in reason and potentially universal principles.
Descriptive ethical relativism supports the observation that moral codes and practices vary greatly among different cultures. Yet, the existence of some common ethical principles across cultures, like the general agreement that unjustified killing is wrong, suggests the possibility of some universal moral truths. On the other hand, the theory of normative ethical relativism faces challenges in explaining moral reforms and universally condemned practices.
The popularity of normative ethical relativism is linked to the evident diversity in moral rules across cultures and the resistance to absolute moral standards. Nevertheless, the debate remains open, and many philosophers have sought a 'third alternative' to moral absolutism and relativism.