Michael Shafer-Landau's Argument On Cultural Relativism

I am going to discuss Shafer-Landau’s argument on Ethical Relativism, specifically his stand on Cultural Relativism.
1. Cultural Relativism says that a society’s or cultures basic ideals are considered morally right.
2. Cultural Relativism cannot make sense of moral progress.
3. Cultural Relativism contradicts itself because different societies can have different views.
4. Cultural Relativism doesn’t account for morality’s true nature.

In support of Premise #2: Shafer claims “If a person’s or a society’s deepest beliefs are true by definition, then they cannot change for the better,” and although beliefs may change it is only proving moral improvement rather than moral progress. What Shafer means by this is, easing out of racist attitudes over time cannot be moral progress because it was once a strong belief of many, so it is only a change in moral code.

In
For Example, when societies disagree about the status of women, according to cultural relativism, the members of each society are speaking the truth when they express their support or disapproval with female equality, but both sides cannot be correct.

Part II

I think that Shafer-Landau’s argument is true. This is because it is easy to see the flaws of this kind of Ethical Relativism- cultural relativism. This world is continuing to become a more sensitive place, which leads to the change in moral beliefs. Changing moral beliefs, that are suppose to be true by original