Thesis Statement: Ethical relativism, within a pluralistic society, will be unable to accomplish the purposes of morality.

            Because a pluralistic society is a society composed of people with different values and from different cultures, ethical relativism within this society will lead to a conflict of morals and values. Within this society, people will be unable to compromise with each other because the morals that each person has entered society with are correct for that person. Ultimately, such inability to acknowledge that certain moral principles are more beneficial to the society than others will prevent morality from fulfilling its purposes.

            There are five purposes of morality: to keep a society intact, to improve human suffering, to enhance human life and make it prosperous, to make use of justice in settling disputes, and to provide society with a way of determining who deserves to be punished and who deserves to be rewarded (Pojman, 2000, 39). Acting as a set of rules designed to enhance the lives of most people in a society, morality can be thought of as a form of social control (Pojman, 2000, 38-39). A person internalizes the moral rules that are set in place in his or her culture and allows these morals to guide his or her actions. Unfortunately, because people in a pluralistic society are part of different cultures and possess different morals, having people follow their own morals will eventually lead the society to fall into disarray.

One of the five purposes of morality is to keep society from collapsing. By having a set of moral rules that most people within a culture follow, morality is able to keep society intact (Pojman, 2000, 40). Having the same moral principles is what unites people. Failure to acknowledge other people's morals and being unable to compromise and accept that certain morals are more beneficial to a society than others will lead to many conflicts in a pluralistic society. Although not everyone's morals will be in conflict with each other, it is inevitable that people possessing different morals from each other will run into conflict with each other. In addition to this, how people act in order to obtain their goals in life will also differ. Therefore, while some might view needs as having to be achieved through peaceful means, others might view aggression as the morally right way to achieve their needs. Because everyone possesses the same needs and humans have a tendency to be selfish (Pojman, 2000, 36-37), the need to obtain resources and the inability to agree upon proper ways to achieve their needs will cause society to enter into a state of nature. In such a state, chaos will reign; society will break down; and suffering will be intensified.

With people fighting to obtain the resources that they need and the desire to obtain a surplus of these resources, not everyone will be able to obtain the most basic necessities for survival. Many will suffer and die. Those that come from an aggressive culture will likely exploit those that enter society carrying with them non-aggressive values. Although one might think that the fittest people within such a society will survive, even this might be too much to hope for. Because nature has designed us to be almost equal, constant fights for resources would endanger the survival of the people within the society.

Through morals, disputes can be resolved in righteous and peaceful ways (Pojman, 2000, 40); however, not when a society cannot agree on what is considered to be a just way of resolving conflicts. With each person possessing a different idea of what justice is and how conflicts should be resolved, set rules on how to deal with conflicts will never be in place because each person's morals, rules and definitions of justice is correct; thus, they will refuse to follow any rules that will go against what is morally right for them. This lack of agreement between people of a pluralistic society will not only lead to an inability for the people to deal with disagreements but also take away from the society its ability to tell people what is right or wrong.

Morality is able to tell people what is right or wrong and what they should or should not do through the use of punishments and rewards. By internalizing the praises and rewards or blames and punishments that they receive, people are able to know what is right and what isn't. They are able to put into action their values. However, having different moral principles that are correct for each of them, it will be impossible to figure out who should or should not be punished in a pluralistic society. Ethical relativism states that people ought to do what their culture's morals state; thus, ethical relativism with a pluralistic society will result in an inability to determine what is morally wrong and deserving of a punishment. Ethical relativism with such a society will be unable to fulfill this fifth purpose of morality.

According to Pojman, morality has five purposes (Pojman, 2000, 39); however within a pluralistic society, ethical relativism will be unable to fulfill these purposes. In such a society, these purposes will be fulfilled through compromise and setting aside differences in order to provide a better life for everyone.