Pojman claims that modern culture of tolerance and acceptance geared public away from moral objectivism, which he defines as "the view that there are universal moral principles, valid for all people at all times and climes" (p. 57). In order to demonstrate the pitfalls of such approach, Pojman examines the premises of ethical relativism, breaking it down to Diversity and Dependency Thesis and analyzes how it compares to a "very modest objectivism." In the Diversity Thesis Pojman points out that ethical relativism maintains that there are no universal moral principles because a definition of right or wrong varies widely among different societies. Moral rules differ from society to society, and it's hard to pinpoint common moral features based…show more content… In the former, he claims, the application of principles depends on the circumstances of the particular cultural environment, while in the latter the cultural environment itself leads to the evolvement of specific beliefs. To illustrate the point of weak relativism Pojman is using two examples describing the Inuits practicing euthanasia and Sudanese tribe sacrificing their disabled children to the hippopotamus. In these two scenarios, Pojman speculates that even though both tribes express their beliefs differently, they have common underlying principle behind their actions. Based on these examples Pojman derives the idea that "there could still be a set of general moral norms applicable to all cultures and even recognized in most" (p. 62). Contrary, strong relativism, unlike the weak one, would assert that "all principles are essentially cultural inventions" (p.62). However, Pojman is not convinced that strong relativism somehow is more preferred to the weak one. Instead of indiscriminately accepting certain behaviors as a product of cultural inheritance, Pojman advocates for practicing sympathy and understanding in the critical inquiry and reasoning approach in the quest for "truth on moral
