Culture expresses itself in many ways, shapes, and forms. Many of these are interconnected to everyday life, and just as many are unnoticeable if one does not know where to look. Each culture has their own deeply ingrained set of rules and social requirements; this includes a moral code. The Dou Donggo people are an example of separate morality in motion – existing side by side with an outsider legal system, with a different standard of morality, and different standard of ideals to go with it.
The morality of Dou Donggo culture is tightly tied to its social hierarchies and relations – they decide who enforces it and who gets punished. Violations of Indonesian law or, more frequently, Dou Donggo moral law are not reported to the police (though
…show more content…
Bukati or even whole cases may be fabricated for the ideal outcome, something that even the doumatuatua may know of. This shows a definitive gap between the importance of truth and the desired outcome – truth is not something that causes deep moral conflict on the part of the Dou Donggo. It is a secondary moral, something of lesser importance unless it can be used to manipulate others to the benefit of the rafu. This is a clear distinction between what we as a western culture publicly view as acceptable in a trial situation like a paresa – when treated with subterfuge it may be another matter. However this could merely be down to a matter of population size. The Dou Donggo are a group of 25,000 indivduals overall; but this population is divided into much smaller hamlets. In such small communities there is little privacy, and it would be easier for a majority of people to agree on what qualifies as ‘the greater good,’ what is in the best interest of the group as a whole. “It is not the purpose of a paresa to determine facts or guilt or innocence. Its purpose is to ngoa ro tei, to inform and teach; its purpose is to make people like la Ninde aware of who he is and what his obligations are.”(175) It may be a harsh system but it is one that ultimately values rehabilitation and acceptance over …show more content…
Their interpretation of the role of morals is more of a tool to attain what is needed by the rafu, the processes one to help bond the people together. This togetherness dictates so many aspects of Dou Donggo society, tied by their culture to each other and their own role in the group. Both the right to contribute their opinion and the knowledge of when it is appropriate to contribute are very freeing aspects of society, and the security that comes with it is a comforting prospect. Individuals are shaped by each other, by what is accepted and expected and thus by the culture
The Hmong people, an Asian ethnic group from the mountainous regions of China, Vietnam and Laos, greatly value their culture and traditions. The film “The Split Horn: Life of a Hmong Shaman in America” documents the seventeen year journey of the Hmong Shaman, Paja Thao and his family from the mountains of Laos to the heartland of America. This film shows the struggle of Paja Thao to maintain their 5000 year-old shamanic traditions as his children embrace the American culture. Moreover, the film shows that one of the major problems refugees like Paja Thao and his family face upon their arrival to the United States is conflict with the American medical system. Despite the dominant biomedical model of health, the film “The Split Horn” shows that
Torres Gregory, Wanda, and Donna Giancola. "Part 2: The Asian Traditions." World Ethics. Eds. Steve Wainwright, Lee McCracken, and Anna Lustig. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage learning, 2002. 197-202. Print.
Determining what is good and what is bad is almost impossible to do. Each individual person & culture both have a different opinion on that. Realistically, there is no one person who can determine if morals are in fact correct or wrong. This is the biggest and most argued flaw with the idea of cultural relativism. Some important facts about cultural relativism is that the idea that a person’s culture shapes their morals and beliefs has been studied for over a century. Bernard Williams is one of the most renowned researches into the topic of cultural relativity. One of the biggest examples of cultural relativism is the treatment of women in Middle Eastern countries, compared to the treatment of women in Western Countries. Another great example of this theory is that children in America are raised to believe that dogs are pets, while in other countries, such as China, dogs are considered a source of food. This theory is most debated through the religious world because religious sects believe that their set of morals is the only correct ones. culturally traditional things begin to shift and change in order to appease the world view of said culture. When you visit other country, keep in mind that there are varied cultures and tradition. Some of the traits or behavior that you are accustomed or familiar
Whether you belong to a certain race, nationality, ethnicity, religion, geographical region or you identify with a certain sex you belong to a particular culture. Culture as define by Shiraev and Levy (2013), “Is a set of attitudes, behaviors, and symbols shared by a large group of people and usually communicated from one generation to the next” (p. ). In other words, we are a product of what has been handed down to us from the generations before. However, culture is evolving and it changes all the time. Hence the reason, no one group has a unique culture, since we are all influenced by each other’s way of life. As a result of this influence, we form relationships with people we know little about and share our values and beliefs with each other. Thereby creating a cross-cultural mix.
cultural rules by focusing the cultural rules on the universal rights of a human being.
Experiencing a society of multi-cultures is beneficial through a variety of concepts to epitomize each individual identity. A person may vary in the degree to which he or she identifies with, morals, or...
Unlike the Zuni, the Dobu value excess, imbalance, and immoderation. The Dobu are self-sufficient and self-reliant. They live in a hostile environment and wear fake smiles and only care about their own personal gain. Dobu’s will kill, cheat, and steal to get the things they want, “Behind a show of friendship, behind the evidences of co-operation, in every field of life, the Dobuan believes that he has only treachery to expect” (171). The most treacherous, deceitful, and dishonest people are the leaders in this society.
The codification of deviance can vary widely between different cultures, a norm in one culture can be considered deviant in another. For example, the notion of cannibalism has been proved by anthropologists to be a spiritually divine form of ritualistic sacrifice in the ancient Aztec culture of Mexico. Yet in Western culture murder and the consumption of human flesh is considered highly revolting, dealt with by harsher consequences by law than most other deviant crimes. These differences are due to the way each individual society develops their own moral codes. These codes are often defined by cultural ideologies, adversity to other cultures and ritualistic practises which have become accepted, as well established patterns in the development of culture. Lloyd, M 2007 implies this by saying 'we are born into a pre existing (social) order the comes ready made with a large stock of norms and rules we must learn if we are to participate as c...
Before taking this class, I often thought that our advanced society was the standard in which to measure all other societies from, but after reviewing the material in this course, it is impossible to make such a comparison. Many of the people in a culture similar to the U.S. would probably find most of the cultures we have studied to be “slow”, strange, or undesirable. In fact, it seems that many of the societies actually prefer to live the way they do and accept it as normal. “Normal” is a relative term, and it is difficult to establish evidence to label a culture or its characteristics abnormal. What may seem to work here often would be disastrous to other cultures.
It holds that, as a matter of fact, moral beliefs and practices vary between cultures (and sometimes between groups within a single society). For instance, some societies condemn homosexuality; others accept it; in some cultures a student who corrects a teacher would be thought to be disrespectful; elsewhere such behavior might be encouraged. The rules, principles and standards that constitute a morality differ in different religions, and cultures, just as they differ historically. The morality of ancient Greece was not the morality of feudal Europe or contemporary American; the morality of the Trobriand Islanders is not the same as the morality of the Kwakiutl Indians (Barnet, 2008). In this paper I intend to argue that moral reasoning
Every individual is taught what is right and what is wrong from a young age. It becomes innate of people to know how to react in situations of killings, injuries, sicknesses, and more. Humans have naturally developed a sense of morality, the “beliefs about right and wrong actions and good and bad persons or character,” (Vaughn 123). There are general issues such as genocide, which is deemed immoral by all; however, there are other issues as simple as etiquette, which are seen as right by one culture, but wrong and offense by another. Thus, morals and ethics can vary among regions and cultures known as cultural relativism.
In explaining Cultural Relativism, it is useful to compare and contrast it with Ethical Relativism. Cultural Relativism is a theory about morality focused on the concept that matters of custom and ethics are not universal in nature but rather are culture specific. Each culture evolves its own unique moral code, separate and apart from any other. Ethical Relativism is also a theory of morality with a view of ethics similarly engaged in understanding how morality comes to be culturally defined. However, the formulation is quite different in that from a wide range of human habits, individual opinions drive the culture toward distinguishing normal “good” habits from abnormal “bad” habits. The takeaway is that both theories share the guiding principle that morality is bounded by culture or society.
Cultural relativism is the idea that moral and ethical systems varying from culture to culture, are all equally credible and no one system is morally greater than any other. Cultural relativism is based on the concept that there is no “ultimate” standard of good and evil, so the judgement of what is seen as moral, or immoral, is simply a product of one’s society and/or culture. The general consensus of this view is that there is no ethical position that may be considered “right” or “wrong” in terms of society and culture (Cultural Relativism). In this paper I will argue that cultural relativism is not an adequate view of morality by providing evidence of its most common logical problems and faulty reasoning.
How do personal values shape culture, and how does culture affect our understanding and interpretation of seemingly ordinary things?
In the end, what we learn from this article is very realistic and logical. Furthermore, it is supported with real-life examples. Culture is ordinary, each individual has it, and it is both individual and common. It’s a result of both traditional values and an individual effort. Therefore, trying to fit it into certain sharp-edged models would be wrong.