According to moral relativism, there is not a single true morality. There are a variety of possible

moralities or moral frames of reference, and whether something is morally right or wrong, good

or bad, just or unjust, etc. is a relative matter—relative to one or another morality or moral

frame of reference. Something can be morally right relative to one moral frame of reference and

morally wrong relative to another.1

It is useful to compare moral relativism to other kinds of

relativism. One possible comparison is with motion relativism.2 There is no such thing as

absolute motion or absolute rest. Whether something is moving or at rest is relative to a spatiotemporal frame of reference. Something may be at rest in one such frame of reference and

moving in another. There is no such thing as absolute motion and absolute rest, but we can

make do with relative motion and rest. Similarly, moral relativism is the view that, although

there is no such thing as absolute right and wrong, we can make do with relative right and

wrong.

Paul Boghossian suggests a different comparison.3 When people decided that there were no

witches and no such thing as witchcraft, they did not become relativists about witches; they

gave up their beliefs about witches. It would have been a mistake for them to conclude that

witchcraft is a relative matter, so that someone could be a witch in relation to one witch

framework but not in relation to another. An individual might be believed to be a witch by