Shaw also provides a plethora of excellent questions concerning the cultural branch of relativism. Firstly, the concept of a mistaken judgement. As a prime example, pre- Civil War Americans were allowed to keep slaves, however, now Americans agree that this was a mistaken practice. Like cultural relativism, subjectivism must adopt the idea that if one admits that s/he was mistaken in committing some action they were still now wrong in doing so at the time because they did not believe themselves to be mistaken. Similarly, the cultural relativist may appeal to single- state relativism which asserts that we have no right to condemn the conduct of those who came before us, in ages with different moral standards because, as it is commonly put, "things were different then…" Perhaps even more intriguing, then, is to ask of single state relativism: if we are not allowed to condemn the actions of slave owners in the pre- Civil War era, were not those imposing slavery on the Africans wrong to do so in accordance with the relativist outlook? One of the main arguments for slavery in that time period was the notion that the African nation represented a backwards people. Did not the Americans impose their cultural beliefs on them? (Shaw, 15-18)

The aim of this dissertation is not to necessarily determine which view on the relativity of morals is correct. Of course, every man must decide for himself, each to his own. It is my opinion that in almost every debate over some controversial topic the truth of the matter lies somewhere in-between the points being offered. This is not to say that both parties are necessarily wrong, just that people are usually too caught up in denying the other's argument to see what their opponents actually mean. This is not to say, either, that neither side is mistaken, and more often than not the truth lies nearer to one side of the conflicting decisions. Therefore, I shall borrow certain aspects from all of the relevant views to from what is perhaps a clearer picture of what the object of morality is, or should be.

Some topics in this essay:
Truths Relative, Kant Mill, JS Mill, Ethical Relativity, Hence Kant, Categorical Imperative, Edward Westermarck, War Americans, Civil War, Charley Chene, categorical imperative, moral action, judge moral, morality relative, moral judgements, kantian ethics, principals relativism, forth kantian ethics, moral value, shaw 16, worthy note, rightness wrongness action, lie direct conflict, proportion tend promote, pre- civil war,