ABSTRACT
Different societies have different rules, and it is these that determine, in a society, what counts as legal, moral, or mannerly. In this sense, legal and moral relativity is a plain, and well-verified, fact of the matter. Absolutists try to get around this by saying that the Moral Law determines what ought to be done, not what is done; so, actual practices are irrelevant. Rules of law, morality, and etiquette are all in this sense binding; their being so is what distinguishes them from other rules, such as laws of nature, or rules of prudence. Many people will acknowledge that rules of morality and etiquette need no formulation, but lack of verbal articulation is sometimes taken to be evidence that there is no rule of law. Different remarks apply to the doctrine of Natural Law. According to some absolutists, the existence of these universals constitutes proof of the existence of a culturally transcendent and universally binding Moral Law.
