This typically happens when you neither understand the position of your opponents nor what you accuse them to be. Moral relativism is as old as the field of philosophy viz. Sophists in Greece used to advance a form of moral relativism. https://twitter.com/kushal_mehra/status/1294886700729032708

Moral relativism has two components: Descriptive Moral Relativism (DMR) and Metaethical Moral Relativism (MMR). DMR is nothing but empirical fact that different society and culture have different form of morals. It doesn't include any normative evaluation.

MMR on the other hand is the position that considering that the moral standards of different societies are radically different, no moral judgment can be given objectively and the standard of justification itself differs in different societies.

This view doesn't come from postmodernism though but from cultural anthropology. That's why MMR is used to justify the subjugation of women in Islam by applying different standard of justification vis-a-vis Western society or Indian society.

Now, coming to the allegations of trads advocating moral relativist position, they can be accused of it only if they practice MMR. Do they do so? No. They take moral objectivist position by saying that only the views of scriptures constitute the correct moral standards.

Based on the moral standard espoused in Shastras, they subject the morality of other societies to scrutiny to give moral judgments such as characterization of hedonism as degeneracy. They don't apply different standard of justification for different societies.

To sum up, trads have their epistemology and metaphysics sorted out unlike you who have just picked buzzwords from Western podcasters without studying anything substantially.

@Infinitchy

@kryocken