The first ethical belief that the author discusses is Cultural Relativism. It talks about the how diversity is becoming more and more apparent between different cultures worldwide. The author mentions that often customs that are unquestioningly accepted in one part of the world are considered abhorrent in another, for example: human sacrifice. Cultural Relativism claims that there are no absolute standards for moral judgment. Basically says that the values that every culture isn't necessarily wrong, just different. I almost completely disagree with this view. The largest problem I have with it rejects absolute truth and its existence. If one were to make the statement "there is no absolute truth," they would have just proven themselves wrong because that is a self-defeating statement.…
Many people are lead to adopt Ethical Relativism because they believe that it justifies their view that one ought to be tolerant of the different behavior of people in other cultures. However, Ethical Relativism does not really justify tolerance at all. All around the world, there are different types of cultures, which have different ethical values that will be correct according to their cultures. Nevertheless, some people might argue about different cultures that have different moral codes that they can not accept; examples: polygamy and infanticide. On the other hand, Ethical Relativism proposes that we can stop the criticism and be more tolerant with other cultures. To illustrate, we could no longer say that custom of other societies…
Cultural Relativism is the view that all beliefs, customs, and ethics are relative to the individual within his own social context. Cultural relativists believe that all cultures are worthy in their own right and are of equal value. Diversity of cultures, even those with conflicting moral beliefs, is not to be considered in terms of right and wrong or good and bad. Some believe that morality is relative to culture, but some believe that argument is invalid. Some also argue that there is such a thing as moral isolationism.…
Objective moral truths are truths that exist regardless of an individuals or a group opinion. Subjectivists believe that there are no objective moral truths and that morality is decided by the person. For instance, some objectivists would say that it is an objective moral truth that torturing babies is wrong. While subjectivist believe that it is morally true or morally wrong if one approves or disproves of torturing babies. According to subjectivism, things are either right or wrong according to an individuals attitudes and feelings. Cultural relativism differs from objectivists view on moral truths as it believes also there are no objective moral truths. Cultural relativism believe morality is based on the moral code of a culture. Moral codes…
Cultural relativism, as defined by the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. “Is the thesis that a person’s culture strongly influences her modes of perception and thought” Most cultural relativists add to this definition saying that there is no standard of morality. This means that morality is relative to the particular society that one lives in. Prominent ethicist James Rachels has written against this view in his work titled The Challenge of Cultural Relativism. This paper will be focused on evaluating Rachels’ critique of cultural relativism, and whether it was right for him to endorse objective moral realism. Rachels defines this as “a standard that might be reasonably used in thinking about any social practice whatever. We may ask whether the practice promotes or hinders the welfare of people whose lives are affected by it.” That is the moral worth of an action is based upon how it contributes to the society from which it operates in.…
Shaw gives an obvious and unconvincing example. He compares abortion in two different societies; it is absolutely wrong in Catholic Spain, but widely accepted in Japan. Most readers would agree that this occurs and abortion is a topic that the world will most likely never come to agreeing terms with. Therefore, relativism is actually significant in each culture. Cultural relativism is complicated in that a whole group of people within an area believe in what they've always been told. Shaw gives an excellent example about slavery in the south. Decades ago, it unfortunately existed and it was acceptable in that time period. However, now it is clearly immoral. A relativist would think that it is acceptable because it was part of the culture. It is not steady to keep changing morals through time. So, who distinguishes right from wrong in that whole society in the first place?…
Moral relativism did not become a prominent topic in philosophy or elsewhere until the 20th century. Moral relativism is the making of an excuse for the action done. Behaviors should not be dismissed under certain circumstances. Moral relativism is dangerous and illogical which can be seen through murders, abortion, and lying.…
Relativism is the idea that one's beliefs and values are understood in terms of one's society, culture, or even one's own individual values. You may disagree with someone and believe your view is superior, relative to you as an individual; more often, relativism is described in terms of the values of the community in which one lives. The view of ethical relativism regards values as determined by one's own ethical standards, often those provided by one's own culture and background. Rather than insisting that there are moral absolutes, moral claims must be interpreted in terms of how they reflect a person's viewpoint; moral claims are then said to be "right in a given culture" or "wrong for a given society." Perhaps one person lives in a culture where having a sexual relationship outside of marriage is regarded as one of the worst things a person can do; in this culture a person engaging in extramarital sex may be punished or even forced to leave. But another culture might have a considerably different…
We all come from different places and are born into different beliefs and do not always agree with one another in what is true and what is not. From television, to Internet and newspapers we get to read what surround us, what is happening in our every day life, but what are we reading and watching is it trustworthy? Can they tell us what is true or false? People disagree about many issues presented to them for example what is said in religion to what science proves and so on. This is where cultural relativism comes in, morally is correct to the beliefs and ethics of a particular culture within that same society. By this theory, no one can go against another society and say that their beliefs are right or wrong; it is up to one’s society where they choose what is correct or wrong. Philosopher James Rachels argues, cannot conclude a disagreement based on opinions on an issue and there could be possible a certainty of truth behind it. Considering this next argument provided by…
Fluehr-Lobban believes that other cultures should have their own moral values. Fluehr-Lobban's main views on cultural relativism is that other cultures should have their own moral values and that we should respect them and educate ourselves about their culture. Cultural relativism states that moral evaluation is rooted in and cannot be separated from the experience, beliefs, and behaviors of a particular culture, and hence, that what is wrong in one culture may not be so in another.…
What one may believe is right and worthy in their own culture may seem taboo in another culture’s standards. This is because of the use of cultural relativism, which is the belief that something is good or wrong if and only if it is approved or disapproved in a given culture. Right and wrong values vary from society to society; therefore, there is no standard base to judge what is universally right or wrong between the different cultures. Because of this, societies may disagree about the morality of what is right and wrong. Gensler believes that if cultural relativism is true, then there are no right or wrong moral values within a culture’s belief, because objective truths can still exist.…
Cultural relativism is contradictory when it states that every culture should embrace a policy of tolerance towards other cultures. To begin with, cultural relativism states right and wrong differ from one cultural to another, it does not imply that other cultures have to tolerate that point of view. The fact of the matter is, one culture believes one idea and another may have another idea. These cultures are not going to change their point of view, or remotely agree with the other culture if their views are contradictory. Each culture has its own beliefs, there is no room for tolerance in true cultural relativism.…
+ while cultural relativism is "the concept that the importance of a particular cultural idea varies from one society or societal subgroup to another, the view that ethical and moral standards are relative to what a particular society or culture believes to be good/bad, right/wrong." (dictionary.com)…
Anthropologist use unique perspectives in order to judge a specific culture, and approach the studies of cultures using Cultural Relativism and Ethnocentrism. The definition of these terms is very different in many ways when describing cultures. Cultural Relativism is defined as the perspective that any aspect of a culture must be viewed and evaluated within the context of that culture. While, ethnocentrism, is defined as making value judgments based on one’s own culture when describing aspects of another culture. Cultural relativism is much more commonly used by anthropologist due to the simple fact maintaining respect and avoiding ignorance to ones culture custom, cultural trait, belief, activities, or any other values and traditions of a culture. As for ethnocentrism, it is the opposite of cultural relativism. Ethnocentrism makes value judgments from their native culture, towards another ones culture in order to judge their elements such as custom, trait, belief, activities and any other value or traditions. This can cause much room for decreasing the values of one’s culture. Judgments like “weird, strange, unethical and backward” are commonly made from using ethnocentrism. In Islam, females are required that they wear proper, decent, modest, and clean clothes and are instructed by Allah in the Quran to wear as a minimum Hijab, or head covering. When an Islamic woman is home however, she may free her beauty in front of immediate family such as her husband, children, brothers, uncles, grandfathers, and other males. An example of cultural relativism perspective would have a statement like such: “Islamic women cover their beauty with a clean, modest Hijab when in public.” This statement takes a step into the culture for the judgment, and that’s why it is Cultural relativism. An example of ethnocentrism would have a statement like such: “Islamic offensive tradition forces women to cover their face in a Hijab in public.”…
What is culture? What difference does it make that humans live in societies? How are we to locate distinct cultures in the contemporary world where people and goods constantly (but not freely) move? How such cultures are daily being reproduced, commented upon and criticized, transformed, or newly produced? This course will introduce the field of socio-cultural anthropology through the exploration of some of its central topics, methods and theories. We refuse to see “culture” as a bounded “thing” in a particular place or as a fixed and timeless characteristic of a certain group of people. Instead, we focus on the politics of culture, in which culture is not only transmitted and reproduced but also challenged, evoked, and produced from both within and outside.…