Subjective truths are based on internal preferences and change according to our whims. Objective truths, in contrast, are realities in the external world that we discover and cannot be changed by our internal feelings. External facts are what they are, regardless of how we feel about them.1https://www.bethinking.org/truth/the-death-of-truth/2-what-is-moral-relativism
Example of Objectivism: If I say that the sum of two plus two is four, I’m making a different sort of claim than stating my taste in ice cream. As a subject, I’m communicating a belief that I hold about an external, objective truth. If you disagreed and said that two plus two equals five, I could claim you were wrong without being accused of an impropriety. In themselves, mathematical equations are either true or false, having one right answer. They do not have a variety of ‘right’ answers that vary according to individual tastes. If we disagreed on the sum, we’d adjudicate between our two opinions by examining the object itself. Our goal would not be to share our feelings but to find the correct answer, because in this case we believe the truth to be objective ‘out there,’ not subjective or ‘in here.’
Example of Subjectivism: When I say, ‘Haagen-Dazs butter pecan ice cream is absolutely delicious,’ I have said something true, because this statement accurately reflects my personal tastes.[2] Notice, however, that what I have said is not really about ice cream. I have not made a claim about an object outside of me, a half-eaten pint of frozen dessert sitting on my counter. Rather I have said something about the subject, me. My statement about the taste of Haagen-Dazs ice cream is a subjective truth. It is true for me, the subject, but not for the object, the ice cream itself. The ice cream doesn’t ‘taste’; I taste it. The experience of flavour pertains to me as a subject, not to the ice cream as an object. That’s why when I comment on the flavour, I’m talking about something true about me, not about the ice cream-subjective, not objective. Tastes are personal. They’re private. They’re individual. If you didn’t like butter pecan and favoured chocolate instead, it would be strange to say that you were wrong. You should not be faulted, it seems, for having different subjective tastes about desserts than someone else.
Moral Relativism is a Type of Subjectivism. Moral Relativism holds that moral truths are preferences much like our taste in ice cream. The validity of these truths depends entirely on the one who says, ‘It’s true for me [the subject] if I believe it.’
Paul Copan says: “Moral relativism maintains that there are no moral absolutes, no objective ethical right and wrong. Moral values are ‘true’ or ‘genuine’ for some, but not for others. Since there are differing expressions of morality in the world, there is no reason to think that one is any more true and objectively binding than another. The implication is that statements of value (for example, ‘adultery is morally wrong’) can be true for some but false for others. Something is wrong with ‘sleeping with the boss, stealing paper clips, or leaving work early’ only if you think or feel it is wrong.2https://www.issuesetcarchive.org/issues_site/resource/archives/copan.htm
References