Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The difference between cultural relativism and ethical relativism
The doctrine of moral relativism
The doctrine of moral relativism
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Having the moral belief that each person has the responsibility of their own moral standards and that each person understand that others around them may not have the same moral standards as others is called moral relativism. Cultural moral relativism is pertaining to another’s person culture to set the moral standard for other people in the community. The difference from both is that the standards are set by an individual’s own personal beliefs, as oppose to the other, a person’s beliefs are impacted by the community that they happen to be a part of. One of the strength of individual moral relativism is that people are able and willing to endure the beliefs of others in a society that involves a lot of different cultures in which helps unite them together. As oppose to the weakness, not having a large community base for the moral standards. A strength in a culture relativism is in fact that it does help create a recognizing sense of community in a culture where individuals have similar beliefs. A weakness will be that some cultural might. For example: The same sex marriage standpoint that many Christian’s churches stand for and do not agree upon. Many have the belief that God created a man and woman so that they can unite together and create a child. Many people still till this day stand to that belief. …show more content…
Kohlberg had six stages that were divided into three levels, pre-conventional morality, conventional morality, and post-conventional morality.
He was interested in the different ways individuals acted upon. The first level was learning morals, manners, wrong and right, and obedience. The second level of the 6 stages is basically acting in your own best interest. Meaning, following the rules and or following your morals. For example: “you scratch my back, I scratch yours”. The level basically indicates to take others feelings into consideration, meaning, understand others culture, values and morals. For example: fitting and trying to please the next
person. I made an ethical stance at work by helping a customer, she was elder woman, I will around 65 years old, she had dropped off her husband at the airport, they were already running late and she had no idea where she had parked and she had already been looking for her vehicle for over 3 hours! Remind you, Los Angeles airport is not so small, it’s one of the largest airports, and one of the busiest airports, we have 7 different parking structures in which hold over 2,000 vehicles, the lady was exhaust!, I briefly ask her a few questions so that I can have a better idea where to start looking. It took my about an hour but I was able to locate her vehicle, I was glad she came across me because not many would of went out of there way especially if your were heading to clock out which that was my case, I ended up doing overtime and it was well worth it. It was something good I did for someone and I felt great to be able to bring a smile and some sort of relief to her. During the 8 years I been working with the company I have made many smile, laugh, and have made their experience at LAX a little more memorable, and with that it makes me happy and I love doing what I do.
Cultural relativism is defined as the belief that no one culture is superior to another morally, politically, etc., and that all “normal” human behavior is entirely relative, depending on the cultural
"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
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
Cultural relativism is a theory, which entails what a culture, believes is what is correct for that particular culture, each culture has different views on moral issues. For example, abortion is permissible by American culture and is tolerated by the majority of the culture. While, Catholic culture is against abortion, and is not tolerated by those who belong to the culture. Cultural relativism is a theory a lot of individuals obey when it comes to making moral decisions. What their culture believes is instilled over generations, and frequently has an enormous influence since their families with those cultural beliefs have raised them. With these beliefs, certain cultures have different answers for different moral dilemmas and at times, it is difficult to decide on a specific moral issue because the individual may belong to multiple
“Abortion or induced abortion, by definition is the deliberate termination of a pregnancy via surgical or medical means” (Vaughn, 2013, p. 163). For many years debating the legality and morality of abortion has caused uproars both publically and privately among politicians, religious leaders and the general public. This paper is intended to bring insight to the subject from two ethical theories, Subjective Relativism and Virtue Ethics. After reviewing the subsequent material you will realize abortion in cases of rape is absolutely morally acceptable.
Cultural relativism is perfect in its barest form. Even though many peoples have many different beliefs and many of these people believe that their own moral code is the only true one, who can say which is better than another? This is the struggle that cultural relativism sets out to permanently resolve. It seems as if cultural relativism could bring about natural equality among groups of differing beliefs. After all, no one belief can be qualified (attributed) as being superior or better than any other belief. ...
Relativism is a view that states that ethical truths depend on the individuals and groups
Capital punishment is defined as a government sanctioned punishment by death. The sentenced is referred to as a death sentence. Descriptive ethical relativism is a theory that I would choose for support against capital punishment. This scientific theory describes the fact that in different cultures one of the variants is the sense of morality. The customs and ethical principles are all different in each culture, what is thought to be moral in one culture may thought to be immoral and even made illegal in one other culture or country. Capital punishment is a human rights abuse that is applied in the USA which is expensive, racist, fallible, and put innocent lives at risk. Capital punishment is expensive and honestly could be avoided
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.
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.
In ones adolescent years, an important figure or role model taught the values of morality, the importance between right and wrong and the qualities of good versus bad. As the years, decades, and centuries have passed by, the culture of morality and the principles that humankind lives by have shifted and changed over time. In the article, “Folk Moral Relativism”, the authors, Hagop Sarkissian, John Park, David Tien, Jennifer Cole Wright and Joshua Knobe discuss six different studies to support their new hypothesis. However, in order to understand this essay, one must comprehend the difference between moral objectivism and moral relativism, which is based on whether or not the view of what someone else believes in, is morally correct or incorrect. For instance, moral objectivism is not centered on a person’s beliefs of what is considered right and wrong, but instead, is founded on moral facts.
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.
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.
Ethical Relativism – Ethical Relativism means there is no one moral claim that is true for all people, all of the time (Boss 5). In other words, individuals can turn to reason or logic to ground moral intuitions. Ethical relativism is individualized on the basis of morality (5). An ethical relativist believes that people create reality, which pertains to individual and subjective ethical relativism (4). On the other hand, social and cultural relativism focuses on the morality that is relative to the norms of an entire culture (4).
It is flawed in the sense that it underestimates similarities and overestimates differences between cultures that prove that there is a universal standard for ethics among all human beings when we understand context and rules of morality that are consistent through all cultures. We are all able to judge each other’s cultures and our own cultures because that is how moral progress is accomplished. If there is moral progress and a universal standard of ethics than cultural relativism cannot