Analysis Of Moral Disagreements By Kwame Anthony Appiah

In the article “Moral Disagreements”, Kwame Anthony Appiah discusses how disagreements occur when value based questions are asked. Appiah states the relevance of this topic by mentioning that individuals do not have to go to distances in order to be engaged in a moral discussion. Due to technology the world is more connected than ever, brining everyone together regardless of location. This results in the display of various cultures, believes and values. It is important to keep in mind that “if we are to encourage cosmopolitan engagement, moral conversations between people across societies, we must expect disagreements.” According to Appiah it is crucial to understand that every society is unique. There are similarities across societies

Expressions such as family, dietary restrictions and religious taboos are all present in every culture. But the way they are interpreted differs around the world. The notion of a family in the Akan culture is different from the perception of family in the Canadian culture. Appiah states: “the conception of the family in Akan culture is what anthropologists call matrilineal”. The Akan family Structure follows the mothers’ side of the family. Where in the Canadian culture it’s patrilineal and follows the fathers’ side of the family. Whether it is matrilineal or patrilineal both societies still consider this family. Appiah also explains that family is not the only term that seems to change. Dietary restrictions is also another term that is constantly shifting. People often assume that others are just like them. It is through multinational discussions where such assumptions are but to test. Appiah explains the difference in terms of dietary restrictions across difference societies through the Bush clan. Appiah states:” Bush cow clan is forbidden from eating bush meat. Your clan animal is symbolically a relative of yours; so for you eating it and its relatives is a bit like eating a person”. While this explains the reason as tow why the Bush clan cannot consume cow meat, the idea of comparing eating a cow to eating a relative might seem

Certain Societies value certain principles more than others. Appiah uses Confucius as an example, he says. “Confucius placed a great deal more weight on obedience to authority.” As a pose to what other societies value such as freedom. Which further proves that individuals are usually in agreement although Confucius might value freedom he values obedience a lot more. As a matter of fact when it comes to moral viewpoints all do agree in a sense but certain values are viewed more or less important. Thus determining how they react towards the issue. Appiah says.” No reasonable person thinks that it’s a good thing to punish innocent people. But we all know that human institutions are imperfect.” According to Appiah all individuals are against the punishment of individuals whom are guilt free. With that being said it does not mean that the system will be changed. But it is just a general notion in which people are opposed to the idea itself. Regardless it is a mistake that will occurs once in a while and the people are aware of that. When it comes to capital punishment it is perceived as a bigger issue, with the concern of killing the wrong person. Ending and innocent life is weighted more than just punishing the wrong person. Appiah mentions. “Many proponents of capital punishment believe it’s important to