Let us consider, for example, what it happened to the canibalismo and the slavery and the effect of the moral persuasion and the legal sanctions on the racial and sexual discrimination. At least part of the diversity it yielded ahead of a reasonable persuasion. Of a Christian perspective, this is particularly worthy of attention, in a similar way that the light of the truth can correct distortions of resultant behavior and consistency of the sin. It is also observed as the relativismo is impracticable ahead of cultures in conflict. If all morality is relative, that moral objections could be interposed before holocausto nazista or the economic crushing of inferior classrooms in Latin America, or ahead of a militarista country that used nuclear weapons against excessively? Or what it would be made a mistake in the accomplishment of painful experiences in children, using them for study of the psychological effect of the mutilation? In a world where a moral court of appeal does not exist, the force produces the effect. The only one I appeal possible it could be to the force, not to be that let us find common bases of coexistence in principles and values. The thesis of the diversity, therefore, in such a way exaggerates the variety how much the extension of the ethical relativismo. In any way, this does not imply nor that the practical moral must vary as they vary, nor that the moral beliefs cannot be true, independently of as the people really they behave.
e) The thesis of the dependence the relativistas, as the anthropologist above cited, supports the thesis of the dependence, this is, that the moral is a question of independent rational judgment, but depends on the cultural context. Therefore, the particular moral of a people cannot be different of what in fact it is. It does not matter if its moral beliefs are true or false.