Moral Relativism Is Relative To One's Culture

1052 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: The case for moral relativism

MORAL RELATIVISM

Moral Relativism is the idea that there is no universal or absolute set of moral principles, meaning that what is morally right to you might not be morally right to me so it is more of “to each his or her own” and no one has the right to judge another. Moral relativism promotes tolerance because it encourages one to try to understand or accept other cultures and beliefs on their own terms, it believes that “when in Rome, do as the Romans do”.
Ethics are moral principles that govern a person’s behavior or actions and I believe some things are simply either right or wrong and there are no grey areas like torturing an infant, rape and murder.
As much as we would want to believe that morality is relative to one’s culture and that …show more content…

I believe I was created and did not evolve so am clearly for moral absolutism. There is a lot of contradiction in moral relativism because they propose we should be tolerant of others culture and beliefs and this in itself is a form of absolutism for instance, when the relativist ask that people treat others as they would want to be treated then, they are appealing to those people to adhere to some standard that they are assumed to know, and this assumption is supposed to be a universal standard which in itself is absolute. Some relativist when it comes to some morally wrong cultures reject relativism themselves for instance the killing of albinos for the presumed magical healing powers their bones contain, the killing of twins because they are presumed evil, marrying an 8-year-old little girl off to a 45-year-old man or the torturing of babies because the culture permits it. Though some would argue that the significant challenge of moral absolutism is that there will always be disagreements about what is morally right and what is not and that all people cannot possibly agree on the same thing as being morally right or wrong but am sure everyone agrees that premeditated murder is wrong. Anti-abortionist (Pro-life), and abortionist (Prochoice) both agree that murder is wrong which agrees with moral absolutism, but the disagreement here is on whether abortion is

Show More
Related

  • The Case Against Moral Relativism

    278 Words  | 1 Pages

    "Who's to judge who's right or wrong?" In the case against moral relativism Pojman provides an analysis of Relativism. His analysis includes an interpretation of Relativism that states the following ideas: Actions vary from society to society, individuals behavior depends on the society they belong to, and there are no standards of living that apply to all human kind. An example that demonstrates these ideas is people around the world eat beef (cows) and in India, cows are not to be eaten. From Pojman second analysis an example can be how the Japanese take of their shoes all the time before entering the house. In Mexico it is rare that people take off their shoes. They might find it wired or not normal. In his third analysis he gives that sense moral relativism and cultural relativism are tied together, that their can be no

    Read More

  • Martin Luther King Utilitarianism Essay

    2007 Words  | 5 Pages

    In its entirety, moral relativism is comprised of the belief that, as members of various and countless cultures, we cannot judge each other’s morality. If this theory stands true, then “we have no basis for judging other cultures or values,” according to Professor McCombs’ Ethics 2. Our moral theories cannot extend throughout cultures, as we do not all share similar values. For instance, the Catholic tradition believes in the sacrament of Reconciliation. This sacrament holds that confessing one’s sins to a priest and

    Read More

  • Analysis Of Moral Relativism

    1083 Words  | 3 Pages

    Moral relativism maintains that objective moral truth does not exist, and there need not be any contradiction in saying a single action is both moral and immoral depending on the relative vantage point of the judge. Moral relativism, by denying the existence of any absolute moral truths, both allows for differing moral opinions to exist and withholds assent to any moral position even if universally or nearly universally shared. Strictly speaking, moral relativism and only evaluates an action’s moral worth in the context of a particular group or perspective. The basic logical formulation for the moral relativist position states that different societies have empirically different moral codes that govern each respective society, and because there does not exist an objective moral standard of judgment, no society’s moral code possesses any special status or maintains any moral superiority over any other society’s moral code. The moral relativist concludes that cultures cannot evaluate or criticize other cultural perspectives in the absence of any objective standard of morality, essentially leveling all moral systems and limiting their scope to within a given society.

    Read More

  • Law Enforcement's Role In A Free Society

    765 Words  | 2 Pages

    that

    Read More

  • Thesis Statement On Moral Relativism

    1003 Words  | 3 Pages

    Moral relativism is the concept that people’s moral judgement can only goes as far a one person’s standpoint in a matter. Also, one person’s view on a particular subject carries no extra weight than another person. What I hope to prove in my thesis statement are inner judgements, moral disagreements, and science are what defend and define moral relativism.

    Read More

  • The Challenge Of Cultural Relativism By James Rachels

    1031 Words  | 3 Pages

    For example: So euthanasia is right for person A if he approves of it, but wrong for person B if she disapproves of it, and the same would go for cultures with similarly diverging views on the subject (13). Cultural relativism seems to many to be a much more plausible doctrine. To many people this is true; supported as it is by a convincing argument and the common conviction that is admirably consistent with social tolerance and understanding in a pluralistic world (Vaughn 15). However, cultural relativism is not the most satisfactory moral theory. ‘“Cultural relativism implies that another common place of moral life illusion moral disagreement, and such inconsistencies hint that there may be something amiss with relativism. It seems it conflicts violently with common sense realities of the moral life. The doctrine implies that each person is morally infallible”’ (Vaughn 14). Rachels states that, “cultural relativism would not only forbid us from criticizing the codes of other societies; it would stop us from criticizing our own” (Rachels 700). However, there are some reasons one may accept relativism and it is because it is a comforting position. It relieves individuals of the burden of serious critical reasoning about morality, and it

    Read More

  • How Does Shakespeare Respond To Puck's Apology

    1192 Words  | 3 Pages

    that

    Read More

  • Moral Relativism and Problems Associated With this Philosophy

    824 Words  | 2 Pages

    Moral relativists believe that no one has the right to judge another individuals choice, decisions, or lifestyle because however they choose to live is right for them. In addition everyone has the right to their own moral beliefs and to impose those beliefs on another individual is wrong. At first glance moral relativism may appear ideal in allowing for individual freedom. After all why shouldn’t each individual be entitled to their own idea of moral values and why should others force their beliefs on anyone else. “American philosopher and essayist, Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882), tells us, what is right is only what the individual thinks is right. There is no higher court of appeals, no higher, universal, or absolute moral standard.” (pg 121) Moral relativism means if does not feel wrong than it must be right.

    Read More

  • Difference Between Subjectivism And Cultural Relativism

    1252 Words  | 3 Pages

    Cultural Relativism has an entirely separate meaning. Because this idea defines moral principles as being rooted in the beliefs of a particular culture, it identifies right and wrong in terms of the practices of a specific group of people. For example, the Greeks would burn the bodies of their deceased members. However, the Callations would eat the bodies of their deceased. Assuming that Cultural Relativism is correct means viewing each of these practices as right for the respective culture. In the Greek culture, they say that burning bodies is how to treat the dead so this is right for their culture. On the other hand, the Callations say that eating bodies is the proper way to handle those that have passed on. Because the Callations say this is right, it is right for their culture. The same thought process holds true for practices that are seen as wrong in cultures. For example, the Japanese believe that laughing during business meetings is inappropriate. This is wrong because of Japan’s practices. Cultural Relativism makes moral assessments based on one culture’s

    Read More

  • Moral Relativism

    1958 Words  | 4 Pages

    Moral relativism, as Harman describes, denies “that there are universal basic moral demands, and says different people are subject to different basic moral demands depending on the social customs, practices, conventions, and principles that they accept” (Harman, p. 85). Many suppose that moral feelings derive from sympathy and concern for others, but Harman rather believes that morality derives from agreement among people of varying powers and resources provides a more plausible explanation (Harman, p. 12).The survival of these values and morals is based on Darwin’s natural selection survival of the fittest theory. Many philosophers have argued for and against what moral relativism would do for the world. In this essay, we will discuss exactly what moral relativism entails, the consequences of taking it seriously, and finally the benefits if the theory were implemented.

    Read More

  • Ethical Relativism and Cultural Relativism

    714 Words  | 2 Pages

    For Cultural Relativism, it is perfectly normal that something one culture sees as moral, another may see as immoral. There is no connection between them so they are never in conflict relative to their moral beliefs. However, within the context of Ethical Relativism there’s a significant difference. Normally, two cultures will possess varying proportions of the same normal and abnormal habits yet from a cross-cultural standpoint, what is abnormal in one culture can be seen as properly normal in an...

    Read More

  • What Determines Right & Wrong?

    928 Words  | 2 Pages

    Moral practices are different in many cultures. There are cultural practices that you would expect to be immoral all over the world, but it is not. For example, I do not understand how anyone would feel it is normal to eat love ones who have died. In some cultures, this is normal behavior. It is normal for others to burn the dead. In my culture, we bury the dead. Because I feel it is inhuman for someone to eat their loves after they have died does not give me the right to tell them they are wrong and I am right. This is the means behind ethical relativism. T...

    Read More

  • Essay On The Challenges Of Cultural Relativism

    1459 Words  | 3 Pages

    The practices of many cultures are varied from one another, considering we live in a diverse environment. For example, some cultures may be viewed as similar in comparison while others may have significant differences. The concept of Cultural Relativism can be best viewed as our ideas, morals, and decisions being dependent on the individual itself and how we have been culturally influenced. This leads to many conflict in where it prompts us to believe there is no objectivity when it comes to morality. Some questions pertaining to Cultural Relativism may consists of, “Are there universal truths of morality?” “Can we judge

    Read More

  • Ethical Relativism

    661 Words  | 2 Pages

    Cultural relativism states that moral standards, that are correct, correspond to cultures or societies. It is said “an act is morally acceptable just because it is allowed by the guiding ideals of the society” (Landau, p. 293). In a simpler way to put it, a person’s beliefs and activities should be understood by others in relation to that people’s own culture. There can be no unbiased standard to apply to all cultures, no one can say if someone is right or wrong. For example, it is socially acceptable for y younger teenagers to drink in other countries, but in America it is considered a major crime if you are underage and caught with alcohol.

    Read More

  • Essay On Cultural Relativism

    540 Words  | 2 Pages

    Many theories attempt to explain ethical standards and how certain cultures perceive these standards or practices. When explaining certain ethical standards Cultural Relativism is an failed illogical theory for many reasons. Cultural Relativism is a theory that attempts to explain an idea that no culture is superior to any other culture and that all people’s perspectives are biased by their own cultural background. Generally, it is the opinion that all cultures are of equal value and equality to each other, therefore, there is no one culture is inferior to any other.

    Read More

More about Moral Relativism Is Relative To One's Culture

Open Document