What type of moral reasoning asserts that there are no universal truths and universally valid moral principles?

The correct answer is moral relativism, which posits that moral truths and principles are not universal but rather are shaped by cultural, societal, and individual contexts. This perspective emphasizes that what may be deemed right or wrong can vary significantly from one group or situation to another, challenging the notion of a single, objective moral standard.

Moral relativism allows for a more nuanced understanding of ethics, recognizing that differing societies may have distinct values and moral codes that are equally valid within their own contexts. This approach fosters tolerance by encouraging individuals to appreciate diverse ethical viewpoints rather than imposing a one-size-fits-all moral framework.

In contrast, moral absolutism asserts that there are universal moral truths that apply to all individuals regardless of context, which stands in direct opposition to relativism. Egoism focuses on self-interest as the basis for moral actions, and utilitarianism measures the morality of actions based on their outcomes, specifically in relation to overall happiness or utility. These perspectives differ fundamentally from the relativist viewpoint, which questions the existence of universally applicable moral standards altogether.