Beyond Moral Relativism: Are There Universal Human Values?

Introduction: The Search for a Foundation of Morality

Throughout human history, one of the most profound philosophical questions has been the nature of morality. Are moral values universal principles that remain true across different cultures and historical periods? Or are they simply social constructions that change according to human needs, traditions, and circumstances?

Every civilization has developed ideas about justice, virtue, responsibility, and human dignity. However, these ideas have not always appeared in the same form. What one society considered honorable, another society may have questioned. Practices accepted in one historical period have sometimes been rejected in another.

This diversity has led many modern thinkers to argue that morality is relative. According to moral relativism, there are no absolute ethical truths independent of human societies. Instead, moral judgments are created by communities according to their particular goals, experiences, and conditions.

From this perspective, concepts such as good and evil, virtue and vice, are not permanent realities. They are changing ideas shaped by social evolution. An action may be considered good in one society if it contributes to its progress, while the same action may be considered wrong in another society with different values and objectives.

The question, therefore, is fundamental:

If societies change, do moral truths change with them?

The twentieth-century philosopher and scholar Allama Muhammad Husayn Tabataba'i offered a detailed philosophical response to this question. In his discussions on ethics and human nature, particularly within his major intellectual work Al-Mizan fi Tafsir al-Qur'an, he examined the foundations of moral relativism and argued that although human societies and moral applications may change, the fundamental principles of ethics are rooted in deeper aspects of human nature.

His approach does not simply reject social change. Instead, it seeks to distinguish between changing expressions of morality and the permanent foundations that make morality meaningful in the first place.

Understanding Moral Relativism

Moral relativism begins with an observation that is difficult to deny: human societies are different.

Throughout history, people have organized their communities according to different laws, customs, and systems of values. Political structures, economic conditions, cultural traditions, and historical experiences have all influenced how societies understand right and wrong.

Supporters of moral relativism argue that this diversity shows that morality is not universal. If different societies reach different conclusions about ethical questions, they argue, then moral values must be dependent on social circumstances rather than based on permanent truths.

According to this view, society itself becomes the source of moral standards.

An action is considered good when it contributes to the goals and survival of a particular community. An action is considered harmful when it prevents that community from achieving its objectives.

For example, if a society believes that expansion, competition, or domination are necessary for its success, it may develop values that support these goals. Another society, with different priorities, may judge the same behaviors negatively.

Moral relativism therefore connects ethics with the development of human societies. Since societies are constantly changing, moral values are also expected to change.

This argument is often associated with theories of social evolution. Human beings, according to this perspective, are constantly adapting to new conditions, and morality develops as part of this adaptation.

The result is the rejection of absolute moral categories. There is no permanent good or evil that exists independently from society. Instead, moral judgments become relative to time, place, and collective goals.

The Consequence of Making Morality Dependent on Society

Tabataba'i examines the implications of this position carefully.

If moral values are completely determined by social goals, then anything that serves a society's objectives could potentially become morally acceptable.

Under such a framework, actions normally considered negative could be justified if they are believed to advance a particular social purpose.

For example, dishonesty, cruelty, or injustice could theoretically be defended if a society claimed that these actions contributed to its success or stability.

At the same time, honesty, compassion, or sacrifice could be criticized if they were considered obstacles to achieving a specific collective goal.

This creates a serious philosophical difficulty:

Can morality truly depend only on what a society wants to achieve?

If the answer is yes, then there would be no universal standard by which societies could criticize injustice, oppression, or harmful practices. A powerful group could simply define its own interests as morally correct.

For Tabataba'i, this creates a contradiction. Human society requires moral principles in order to function, but if those principles are nothing more than temporary social preferences, then society loses the ability to distinguish genuine progress from mere power.

Tabataba'i’s Philosophical Response: Why Change Requires Permanence

To respond to moral relativism, Tabataba'i begins with a fundamental philosophical principle: change cannot exist without continuity.

At first glance, this may appear to be a simple observation, but it has deep implications for understanding human nature and morality.

Everything in the material world is subject to transformation. Human beings grow, societies develop, and civilizations pass through different stages. However, when we say that something changes, we are also implying that there is something that remains connected throughout this process.

Without a continuing element, change would become impossible to define.

For example, a human being passes through childhood, youth, and old age. The person at each stage is different in appearance, knowledge, and experience. Yet we still recognize the individual as the same person because there is an underlying continuity connecting these different stages.

If there were absolutely nothing permanent, we would not have one person developing through time; we would only have unrelated moments with no connection between them.

Tabataba'i applies this reasoning to human nature and society. Human beings change, but their humanity remains. Societies transform, but they remain human societies because they are connected to a common foundation.

Therefore, the existence of change does not eliminate permanence. Rather, change itself proves that there must be something stable that allows transformation to occur.

This distinction is essential when discussing morality.

Moral relativism often observes that ethical practices vary between societies and concludes that morality itself has no permanent foundation. Tabataba'i argues that this conclusion confuses two different things:

The changing ways people understand and apply moral principles.
The deeper foundations of morality that arise from human nature.

The first can change. The second remains.

Human Nature as the Foundation of Ethics

For Tabataba'i, the foundation of morality is not merely social agreement. It is connected to the nature of human beings themselves.

Human beings are not isolated creatures. They possess needs, abilities, and goals that are part of their existence. They seek knowledge, security, happiness, balance, and fulfillment.

Society emerges because individuals cannot achieve all forms of development alone. Cooperation allows human beings to reach levels of growth that would be impossible in complete isolation.

However, society is not the creator of human nature. Rather, society is a means through which human beings develop their natural abilities.

This leads to an important conclusion:

The purpose of society is not simply survival or power. Its deeper purpose is to assist human beings in achieving their proper development.

If morality is connected to human nature, then certain ethical principles cannot be completely relative. They are related to what allows human beings to flourish as human beings.

A society may differ in its laws, customs, and social structures, but the basic requirements of human flourishing remain.

The Four Foundations of Human Virtue

Based on his analysis of human nature, Tabataba'i identifies four fundamental virtues that represent balance and perfection in human life:

1. Wisdom: The Pursuit of Truth and Understanding

Wisdom represents the ability to understand reality correctly and make sound judgments.

Human beings are distinguished by their capacity for knowledge and reflection. Without wisdom, individuals and societies cannot recognize what benefits them or avoid what harms them.

A society that rejects knowledge and reason weakens one of the essential qualities of human existence.

However, wisdom is not merely the accumulation of information. It is the ability to use knowledge properly and make balanced decisions.

2. Courage: The Balance Between Fear and Recklessness

Courage is the ability to face difficulties and defend what is valuable without falling into extremes.

According to Tabataba'i’s understanding, courage exists between two opposite conditions:

Excessive fear, which prevents a person from acting when action is necessary.
Recklessness, which leads a person to act without wisdom or consideration.

True courage is a balanced quality. It allows human beings to protect themselves, defend justice, and overcome challenges while maintaining awareness and responsibility.

3. Temperance: The Balance of Desires

Human beings possess desires and physical needs. These needs are not negative in themselves; they are part of human existence.

However, problems arise when desires lose their proper balance.

Temperance means satisfying legitimate needs in a balanced way without falling into excess or neglect.

A person who is controlled completely by desires loses freedom and harmony. A person who completely ignores natural needs also damages their own well-being.

Therefore, moral excellence requires moderation and balance.

4. Justice: Giving Everything Its Proper Place

Justice is perhaps the most comprehensive virtue because it involves balance within both the individual and society.

For Tabataba'i, justice means recognizing the proper place and rights of everything.

At the personal level, justice means harmony between different aspects of human existence.

At the social level, justice means respecting the rights of others and preventing oppression.

A society cannot achieve genuine progress without justice because injustice destroys the cooperation necessary for human development.

From Individual Virtues to Social Ethics

An important part of Tabataba'i’s argument is that the virtues found in individual human nature also apply to society.

Society is not something completely separate from individuals. It is formed by individuals and reflects their characteristics on a larger scale.

If wisdom, courage, temperance, and justice are necessary for individual perfection, they are also necessary for social perfection.

A healthy society requires:

Knowledge to distinguish benefit from harm.
Courage to protect its values.
Balance to avoid destructive extremes.
Justice to maintain harmony among its members.

Therefore, these virtues are not merely personal preferences. They represent conditions necessary for human beings to achieve a complete and balanced existence.

Universal Principles and Different Applications

One of the strongest challenges to universal ethics is cultural diversity.

History shows that societies have disagreed about many moral questions. However, Tabataba'i argues that disagreement does not necessarily prove that moral principles themselves are different.

The difference may exist in how people understand or apply a principle.

For example, many societies recognize the importance of justice, but they may disagree about what justice requires in specific situations.

A society may defend a certain political system because it believes that system represents justice, while another society may reject it. The disagreement is not necessarily about the value of justice itself, but about its application.

The same applies to concepts such as dignity, responsibility, and freedom.

Human beings may interpret these ideas differently, but their continued importance across cultures suggests that they are connected to deeper human concerns.

Moral Relativism and the Challenge of Social Goals

Another important part of Tabataba'i’s critique concerns the relationship between morality and collective goals.

Some forms of moral relativism argue that ethical values should be judged according to the objectives of a society. In this view, whatever helps a community achieve its desired future becomes morally valuable.

Tabataba'i argues that this position contains a fundamental problem: a goal itself requires a standard by which it can be judged.

Not every social objective is necessarily good simply because a group desires it. History provides many examples of societies pursuing goals that produced suffering, injustice, or destruction.

If the success of a society becomes the only measure of morality, then there would be no way to criticize harmful collective ambitions. A society could justify almost any action by claiming that it serves a higher purpose.

For Tabataba'i, morality cannot be reduced to effectiveness or success. A powerful society is not necessarily a moral society, and a successful political project is not automatically a just one.

There must be a distinction between:

What a society wants to achieve.
What genuinely contributes to human perfection and well-being.

Without this distinction, ethics loses its independent meaning and becomes merely a tool of social power.

The Difference Between Moral Principles and Moral Expressions

A central point in Tabataba'i’s argument is the difference between fundamental moral principles and their various expressions throughout history.

Human societies have developed different customs, laws, and traditions. These differences are real and should not be ignored.

However, diversity in expression does not necessarily mean the absence of universal foundations.

Language provides a useful example. Human languages are extremely diverse. People around the world use different words and structures to communicate, yet all languages are based on the common human ability to understand and express meaning.

Similarly, moral systems may differ in their details while reflecting deeper human concerns.

Justice may be expressed through different legal systems. Compassion may appear in different cultural forms. Responsibility may be understood through different social traditions.

The existence of different forms does not prove that there is no underlying reality.

A Conversation with Western Ethical Philosophy

Tabataba'i’s argument connects with several major discussions in Western philosophy.

One of the closest comparisons can be found in virtue ethics, particularly the tradition associated with Aristotle. Aristotle argued that human beings have a particular nature and that moral virtues represent the development of human excellence.

Like virtue ethics, Tabataba'i emphasizes that morality is connected to human perfection rather than merely external rules.

However, his approach also differs from purely secular accounts because he connects human nature with a broader philosophical understanding of existence and purpose.

His critique also engages with modern moral relativism, which became influential in anthropology and social theory. Many modern thinkers have emphasized that moral beliefs are shaped by cultural environments.

Tabataba'i does not deny cultural influence. Instead, he argues that cultural variation exists within a wider framework of human needs and capacities.

This creates a middle position between two extremes:

The idea that every moral belief is equally valid because cultures differ.
The idea that cultural differences have no significance.

According to his view, societies can make different interpretations while still being evaluated according to deeper principles related to human flourishing.

The Importance of Justice in Human Society

Among the four major virtues, justice occupies a special position because it connects individual morality with social life.

A person may possess knowledge and ability, but without justice these qualities can become harmful.

Knowledge without justice can become manipulation.

Power without justice can become oppression.

Desire without justice can become exploitation.

Justice provides the balance that allows human abilities to serve human development rather than destruction.

For this reason, Tabataba'i argues that every genuine human society requires some understanding of justice. The details may differ, but the fundamental recognition that rights should be respected and harm should be avoided remains essential.

A society that completely abandons justice would undermine the very cooperation that allows society to exist.

Human Development and the Future of Ethics

The debate between moral relativism and universal ethics remains relevant today.

Modern societies continue to face questions about human rights, technology, artificial intelligence, political authority, and social responsibility.

These challenges require more than simply asking what a society prefers. They require asking deeper questions:

What kind of society allows human beings to truly develop?
What values protect human dignity?
What principles remain meaningful despite historical change?

Tabataba'i’s philosophical approach suggests that ethical progress is not merely the creation of new values but a deeper understanding of the permanent dimensions of human nature.

Human beings change, civilizations change, and social conditions change. Yet the search for truth, justice, balance, and human perfection continues.

Conclusion: Beyond Relativism and Absolutism

The debate over moral relativism is ultimately a debate about whether human beings possess a shared foundation beyond cultural differences.

Moral relativism highlights an important truth: human societies are diverse, and moral practices develop within historical contexts.

However, Tabataba'i argues that diversity alone cannot prove that morality has no permanent foundation. Change itself requires continuity, and human societies remain connected through a shared human nature.

From this perspective, ethical principles are not arbitrary inventions of societies. They emerge from the requirements of human existence and the conditions necessary for individual and collective flourishing.

Wisdom, courage, temperance, and justice represent more than cultural preferences. They express fundamental dimensions of a balanced human life.

The challenge for humanity is therefore not to choose between tradition and change, but to discover how enduring moral principles can guide societies through changing circumstances.

A mature ethical vision recognizes both realities:

Human life is constantly evolving, but not everything changes.

Behind the diversity of human experience, there remains a search for truth, dignity, balance, and justice — values that continue to shape the human journey across time and cultures.

Continue Your Journey

Explore more reflections on spirituality, self-knowledge, and the timeless wisdom of the human soul.

Mysticism Journal