system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
Are there any solid arguments against moral relativism?

Seeing as how morality varies wildly across cultures, individuals, and even species, I believe it to be purely subjective. It is something we feel in the soul, rationalize with the mind, and then project onto the world.

Are there any solid arguments against this?
gpt
One thing to be clear on is the difference between descriptive relativism and normative relativism. So, for example, if we try to articulate what different people think about morality we will find this varies by culture and by individual. So, it seems to be that, descriptively, morality is relative in this sense. But this isn't typically seen as the sense that philosophers are interested in. Instead, philosophers are more interested in whether or not moral claims, as such, are relative. 

So, as an analogy: different people believe different things about whether ghosts exist, or the age of the universe, or any other number of things. The fact that these beliefs vary wildly across cultures and individuals, however, need not suggest that these areas are just "purely subjective." Rather, we might think, some people are right and some people are wrong. Similarly, so the thought might go, morality works in the same way: people might believe different things but there are facts of the matter about the moral domain and we use our powers of reasoning and arguments to try to get more clear on these matters.

The above is not yet an argument for moral realism, or even against moral relativism, but more so trying to set the stage for how we might begin to think of such things.