Analysis: A Defense Of Ethical Relativism

Ethical relativism states that moral values vary between different cultures and societies. It "A Defense of Ethical Relativism” written by Ruth Benedict, an anthropologist, strived to explain and explore various examples that supported the eligibility of Moral relativism. This paper asked questions such as what is normal and abnormal? How is culture and morals related? When something is considered as normal, does it subsequently also mean that it’s moral?
Moral beliefs are subjective and they vary amongst different societies. Sociologists define the term “normal" as “is determined but the limits of expected behavior for a particular society”. (Benedict 1934) On the other hand “Abnormality” refers to the segments of behavior that a certain society does not

practice.
From her studies, Benedict observed that what is considered normal varies in different cultures. On the other hand, certain practices that are viewed as abnormal in one society but each society should respect the other ones’ views and standards. According to Sociologists the term “normal" is “an action that falls within expected behavior for a particular society”. (Benedict 1934) Abnormality refers to the segments of behavior that a certain society does not practice.
She argued the validity of her argument further, by stating examples such as how homosexuality in ancient Greece was considered to be a sign of wealth and was widely accepted.

Whereas in most societies homosexuality is considered to be abnormal or immoral. Furthermore, another example would be the society that has been found on an island near the northwest of Melanesia. Their social structure is based upon paranoia of being poisoned or cursed by black magic. They highly respect someone who has “magical” powers. To be a good citizen in this society, one should always be skeptical of things and not trust anyone. Based upon our social standards people who with these traits would most like be admitted to a mental hospital. Another society that perfectly illustrates "The extend to which normality may have been culturally defined” is the Kwakiutl society. This culture has been cut off from the rest of the world and has been isolated for many generations, therefore they are not affected by “civilized” standards. In the Kwakiutl society, mourning over a loved ones’ passing is considered an insult. Instead of that the death of the loves is an insult and the only way to deal with it is by murdering another

individual
In conclusion Benedict’s argument is that; firstly normality differs within various societies so does morality. Secondly, each society has to choose and agree upon what is the normal behavior within their society. Therefore, morality is caused by the agreement within the society and it is relative to culture. Or in her words “normality is just a convenient term for socially approved habits”(Benedict 1934)