Different cultures and religions look at moral principles differently, based on their culture’s understanding of them. With this, it can be assumed that moral diversity is the differences in interpretation of morality. It does not mean though that these diverse principles would always be in contrast with each other. Some may actually be in support with each other. A particular moral diversity argument is the argument for non-objectivism, wherein non-objectivists claim that moral claims are relative and dependent on the beliefs of an individual or group. This is in contrast to a moral objectivist’s point of view wherein the truth and morality is independent of anyone’s judgment.
Non-objectivism emphasizes the diversity between the belief systems of different cultures. Non-objectivism views moral diversity as real and possible since individuals and groups view moral principles and objectives differently. One truth can be the others false, depending on what culture is talking about it. Non-objectivism is concerned about particular views and dispositions of individuals rather than an absolute truth. It sees truth and morals as relative and subjective. Thus, moral diversity is in sync with the principles of non-objectivism.
In contrast, objectivism views truth as absolute. There is only one truth, much like one teaching, similar as how Christianity’s Jesus teaches, that there is only One God. Moral objectivists see moral principles as independent of an individual or group’s interpretation of it. The truth and moral principles are right or wrong regardless of the belief of the person.