Be sure to review the prior to participating in the discussions. You’ll want to review the provided rubric for each discussion prior to posting as well. If you need assistance working in the discussions, review this 2-minute video on .

We strive for academic integrity in all aspects of education, and you are expected to uphold these standards when creating and submitting your discussion. View the for more information on what that means at APUS.

Note the rubric full credit with peer replies: “The student substantively responds to peers/instructor with more than the minimum of two replies”

Ideally, you will submit at least 1 follow up post, if applicable. That is to acknowledge someone’s input on your post. EX: “Thanks for your reply, I agree/disagree with you about….” This is to try to build a conversation rather than just a series of comments.

It is also logistically impossible to have a discussion if we all rely on others to respond to our own posts. So, the best work will include:

1 initial post on the topic

2 replies to other people’s posts

1 follow up/acknowledgement to a comment (this can be shorter).

Discussion Prompt:

When you respond to your peers in the discussion in this course, respond to a learner who has posted a contrary view on the topic you selected and then respond to a learner who has posted on the topic you did not select.

1. Introduce yourself. Please share what you are comfortable sharing about yourself, your family, degree, career (current or planned), and/or anything interesting. In addition, please choose one course objective from the Course Scope, Learning Objectives, and Assessment you feel is of particular interest to you and quickly explain why.
2. Topic: Ethical Relativism
3. Describe ethical relativism in your own words with reference to the readings and videos. What are some of the benefits? What are some of the objections? How does the distinction between realism and ant-realism apply? What examples from the readings/videos did you find interesting? Can you provide any real-life examples or scenarios that you have encountered? Consider also the implications for diversity and tolerance, as noted in the material.

Please be sure to tie your responses directly to the material in the lesson, readings, and videos provided and cite them directly. Everything you need is provided. Outside sources not recommended.

Peer Reply Guidance:

When replying to peers, respond to at least two of your classmates by Sunday at 11:55 p.m. EST and build on their ideas by adding examples or evidence from the readings, videos, or real-life experiences. Ask thoughtful questions or share new perspectives, especially about ethical relativism, realism vs. anti-realism, or diversity and tolerance, to keep the discussion meaningful and engaging.

Please thoroughly edit your writing to ensure it is professional and academic. For more details about the initial post and peer replies are graded, see the .

Specific Instructions: Your initial post must be at least 250 words. Please respond to at least 2 other students substantively. This discussion submission is your official entry into the course, so we have drawn attention to this assignment. You will be reminded of this Discussion in the Week 1 Lesson, but please remember that a 250-word post must be submitted by 11:59 p.m. ET on Sunday of Week 1 to maintain your registration in the course. Students who do not post to this discussion before this deadline will be automatically dropped from the course. There are no exceptions to this requirement.

This discussion aligns with the following:

• Course Objective:

Rubrics

• RAMP LD Discussion Rubric v.5

reply to:

NEISA MCKELLOP- Week 1 – Discussion: Introduction and Ethical Relativism

• Contains unread posts
• NEISA MCKELLOP posted Feb 2, 2026 7:41 PM
• Introduce yourself
• My name is Neisa Mckellop. I was born and raised in Jamaica and emigrated to the USA twelve 12 years ago. Prior to this ,I had the opportunity to engage in the work and travel program in college while pursing an Associate degree in Business Management Having gained this exposure from an earlier age it broaden my mindset which changed the trajectory of my goals for the future. I am an Active soldier based at Fort Riley, KS. I pride myself on being multifaceted and paradoxical in my demeanor. I view the world as my oyster for the undertaking which leads me my travel plans I am curating. I find nature aesthetically pleasing in its many forms and leisure time for reading to be knowledgeable. I am obsessed with Greek mythology, fantasy, art and vintage ideals. I love variations of food and a big takeaway experience for me as well is cultural preparations of foods. I view shopping as therapeutic feelings and it shows my classic sophistication which derives from my love of fashion. I had chosen the degree path in Supply Chain management as it links directly with my MOS as a Unit supply specialist. However, based on my transfer credit, Bachelors of Art in Business maximized the transfers points. Exploring this area made me realize that I was still on the right trajectory to excel in my career and an additional key takeaway was that I have more options to branch off into as I embark on this journey. My outcome I perceive is to excel my current potentials and become advantageous with the knowledge I will gain as I journey along my career path. Freedom is the goal, creating passive income.
• Utilitarianism is fascinating because it’s brutally simple yet wildly complicated in practice. What makes it interesting to me is how it forces one to think about the real world consequences of one’s choices instead of just following rules blindly. It’s also how a lot of people naturally think when making decisions anyway, we weigh pros and cons, consider who benefits and try to minimize harm. Basically, it’s interesting because it’s both common sense and deeply challenging to our moral instincts at the same time.
• Topic: Ethical Relativism
• Ethical relativism is basically saying that right and wrong depend on what your culture believes. If a culture approves of something, then it’s morally okay for people in that culture. The Rebus reading breaks this into descriptive relativism (just observing that cultures differ), metaethical relativism (claiming moral truth IS relative), and normative relativism (saying we shouldn’t judge other cultures). The realism vs anti-realism distinction was interesting. Realists think moral facts exist independently like murder is just wrong, period. Anti-realists say morality is something humans create through culture. It matters because we’re basically asking if we are discovering moral truths or inventing them.
• I get why relativism appeals to people. Growing up in Jamaica and moving to the U.S. twelve years ago, I have seen how different cultures approach things differently. Even with food, ackee is a delicacy in Jamaica but Americans think it’s crazy because it’s poisonous if not prepared right. In the military, I work with international partners who have different views on authority, discipline, gender roles. It would be arrogant to assume the American way is always right. But the readings show where relativism falls apart. The suttee example from the Rebus reading really stuck with me as widows in India expected to burn themselves on their husband’s funeral pyre. If relativism is true, that practice was morally fine because the culture approved. And banning it wasn’t progress, just change? That doesn’t sit right. Obviously ending that practice was an improvement.
• The 1000-Word Philosophy article points out that if relativism is true, the majority is always right. So abolitionists fighting slavery were wrong because most of American culture approved of slavery at the time. But we know the abolitionists were right even though they were outnumbered. There is also this contradiction about tolerance. If relativists say we should universally tolerate all cultures, they’re claiming tolerance is a universal value. But that contradicts the idea that there are no universal values. The Brown framework discusses female genital cutting defenders say it’s tradition or religiously required. But those arguments only work if ALL traditions or ALL religious requirements are automatically moral, which obviously isn’t true.
• I think about Jamaica making progress on women’s rights and education access over time. If relativism were true, we couldn’t call that progress, just change. But it was real improvement.
• What I’m taking from the SCU framework is that the different lenses rights, justice, utilitarian, care ethics give better tools for evaluating ethics than just checking what the majority thinks. In my work as a Unit Supply Specialist, we don’t just say “if your unit thinks cutting safety corners is fine, then it’s fine.” There are objective reasons some practices are better or worse.
• Relativism has a point about cultural humility and not judging every difference. My travel experiences taught me that. But it goes too far saying we can never judge any practice as wrong. Some things as slavery, oppression, practices causing suffering are actually wrong regardless of cultural approval.
• 2 Unread
• 2
• Unread
• 2 Replies
• 2
• Replies
• 5 Views
• 5
• Views
• View profile card for NEISA MCKELLOP
• Last post yesterday at 9:16 PM by NEISA MCKELLOP

Week 1 – Introduction and Ethical Relativism

• Contains unread posts
• Darian Manasse posted Feb 2, 2026 8:32 AM
• Good Morning Professor and Class,
• 1:Introduce yourself:
• Hi everyone, my name is Dee, and Im excited to be in this course with you all.
• Im a mother, a student, and a veteran. I served as a U.S. Navy Hospital Corpsman, where I worked across multiple healthcare settings, including emergency rooms and family medicine clinics. That experience deeply shaped how I view ethics, care, and responsibilityespecially when decisions must be made quickly and the stakes are high. I became a mother while serving, and today Im raising a toddler and infant twins while my husband is still on active duty and deployed. Balancing family life, school, and service has taught me a lot about resilience, sacrifice, and the real-world impact of moral choices.
• Academically and professionally, my focus is on mental health, family health, and veteran health. Im especially interested in prevention, early intervention, and reducing stigma around mental health. Beyond my military background, Im trained as a First Aid Suicide Prevention worker and serve as a self-talk helper, supporting individuals in crisis by helping them challenge harmful internal narratives and recognize their own value. These roles have shown me how ethics isnt abstractit plays out in moments of vulnerability, care, and human connection.
• One course objective that particularly interests me is developing the ability to think about moral problems in a clear and logically consistent manner. In healthcare, mental health support, and veteran advocacy, ethical decisions are rarely black and white. Providers and caregivers often navigate competing valuesautonomy, duty, compassion, and outcomesunder pressure. Im interested in learning how ethical frameworks like Care Ethics, Utilitarianism, and Deontology can help guide decision-making in situations involving trauma, war, end-of-life care, and mental health crises. I believe this course will help me better articulate and strengthen the moral reasoning I already rely on in both my personal life and future career.
• 2: Topic: Ethical Relativism
• Ethical relativism is the idea that moral right and wrong are not universal or objective truths but are shaped by individual beliefs, cultural norms, or social contexts. Rather than assuming one moral standard applies to everyone, ethical relativism suggests that moral judgments depend on where, how, and by whom they are made. The Crash Course video on metaethics explains this position as a form of moral anti-realism, meaning that moral facts do not exist independently of human beliefs or practices (CrashCourse, 2016).
• One benefit of ethical relativism is that it promotes cultural awareness and tolerance. By recognizing that different communities may hold different moral values, ethical relativism helps reduce ethnocentrism and encourages respectful dialogue. This is especially important in diverse settings such as healthcare, where understanding cultural beliefs around illness, mental health, or end-of-life care can improve trust and communication. Ethical relativism also reminds decision-makers to reflect on their own biases before judging others.
• However, ethical relativism faces serious objections. A major concern is that it can limit moral criticism. If morality is entirely relative, then harmful practices could be excused simply because they are culturally accepted. This creates challenges when addressing issues such as discrimination, abuse, or violations of human rights. The Santa Clara University framework for ethical decision-making highlights the need to balance respect for cultural values with principles that prevent harm and protect well-being (Santa Clara University, n.d.-a).
• The distinction between moral realism and moral anti-realism helps clarify this debate. Moral realism argues that some moral truths exist regardless of opinion, while anti-realismaligned with ethical relativismholds that moral claims are socially constructed (CrashCourse, 2016). In practice, ethical decision-making often requires navigating between these views.
• In real life, ethical relativism appears frequently in mental health contexts. Cultural beliefs about self-reliance or stigma can influence whether individuals seek help. While respecting these beliefs is important, ethical relativism alone cannot justify ignoring serious risk. This tension highlights why ethical frameworks must combine cultural sensitivity with responsibility and care.
• References:
• CrashCourse. (2016). Metaethics: Crash Course Philosophy #32 [Video]. YouTube.
• Santa Clara University. (n.d.-a). A framework for ethical decision making.
• Santa Clara University. (n.d.-b). Cultural relativism: Do cultural norms make actions right or wrong?