But the weakening of religious models of subjectivity does not imply that an idyllic view of it can take over. Ethics is still, and now explicitly and dramatically, a basic and central concern for intellectual criticism to be performed on rational grounds. In both cases, feelings and thoughts related to acts are simply discarded as irrelevant to their understanding. Either an ontological myth of dialectical history or one of psycho-mechanical sexuality is then supplied as their context of intelligibility. To criticize an act was or is then to acknowledge the culture it expressed.
All acts are thus 'culturally correct', unless they are insane.
In both cases, the individual agent is irresponsible, and since cultures and 'Unconsciouses' cannot be blamed for being what they are, but must be acknowledged as parts of reality, only other intellectuals who miss the context in their analysis of it can be criticized. Criticism is thereby reduced to internal quarrels among intellectuals and loses its social impact. This is the general profile of cultural relativism . There is per definition no human nature. However, psychological, cognitive, and semiotic research has shown that there is such a thing as a human nature shared by individuals transculturally.