If you teach moral relativism in your ethics courses, as I sometimes do, you may share my frustration about appropriate readings on the topic — particularly defenses of relativism. We're all familiar with some critical work on moral relativism useful for undergraduates, James Rachels' being the best known. But I've found the non-philosophical sources on relativism (e.g., Ruth Benedict) just not intellectually rich enough, while some of the better known philosophical relativists (Harman, Mackie) are too sophisticated for students with little philosophical experience.
So I was pleased to see Jesse Prinz's piece on relativism in Philosophy Now. It offers some of the more philosophically provocative arguments for relativism (appealing to disagreement, how moral attitudes are acquired and reinforced via the emotions, etc.), while still being comprehensible to an attentive undergraduate reader. It also offers some ideas to 'defang' relativism of some its more worrisome normative implications. I'm definitely going to use this the next time relativism is on my pedagogical agenda.