Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Subjective moral relativism vs cultural relativism
Subjective relativism vs cultural relativism
The case for relativism
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Subjective moral relativism vs cultural relativism
According to William Penn "Right is right, even if everyone is against it; and wrong is wrong, even if everyone is for it.” The theory of relativism was first thought of by an ancient Greek sophist, Protagoras. He stated that “man is the measure of all things.” Which means man is the ultimate source of value. If we took a look at the world today, we would see that are many other cultures other than our own. With many cultures within the world, everyone is bound to believe that every culture is different. Even though their different, all of them are similar to each other. So if this is the case, do we as humans have the right to judge these cultures? Although cultures are not alike it is able to be question through culture relativism. …show more content…
Today there is quite a diversity of cultures. Diversity in the food, clothes, language, ethnicity, and beliefs. Do to sins the truth is not subjected; truth is absolute. So if we don’t hurt anyone, simply anything goes. As of today we live in a society of pluralism and tolerance. That cultural relativism is more than just a statement about equality of cultures but a theory of fundaments. Therefore Cultural relativism is experience of man knowing the world which judgments are derive. Judgment, holds, a reliant on experiences that are inseparable from its cultural context. Cultural context such as culture and language. There is no such thing as objective reality, truth, or …show more content…
Some examples of Cultural Relativism is language and religion. Every culture may speak a different language. In France they speak the official language as French. Their culture revolves around the French origin. Tourist in France speak many different languages because they come from all over the world. People in France would think the tourist are in the wrong country because they’re not speaking the language of French. Another language people share is English. The English language is spoken in many country and states. English language is spoken differently throughout each culture and place. In the southern states they speech English with an accent. English has many different accents and beautiful pronunciation. Some people speak English properly and improperly. The British would say all the English accents are wrong and there accent is what’s right. . So the tourist and British are neither right nor wrong for speaking a different language other than French and English a different way. So all in all Cultural Relativism states there is no wrong or right in cultural
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
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
Many of the films that we watched in class portrayed examples of cultural relativism. In the film “Amish on Break”, Becky and Andrew decide to join the U.K. teenagers in the ocean when they take them to the beach. Leah is hesitant to go in the moving water, but Becky and Andrew go in and get the full experience of what it is like to play in the ocean and enjoy the beach, as most teenagers in the U.K. do. This is an example of cultural relativism because the Amish teenagers are engaging in an activity they have never experienced so they can learn what teenagers in the U.K. like to do in their leisure time. They want to learn about this culture and way of life that is truly foreign to them by experiencing it first-hand and engaging in the same activities they do. Another film that exemplifies cultural relativism is the “Emerald Forest.” The father, Bill, finally finds his son Tommy and immerses into the culture of his son’s tribe to better understand him after reuniting with him all these years. In a specific scene, Bill shows that he can be part of the tribe by rubbing the dust of the invisible stones below his eyes and having the pipe blown into his nose to foresee his spirit animal. Although it seems it is a painful experience, Bill goes through with it because he truly wants to see the world through his son’s eyes. Another film that we watched was “Dances with Wolves”, in which Lieutenant Dunbar exemplifies cultural relativism by fully immersing himself into the Sioux
After analyzing cultural relativism over the semester, I have come to the conclusion that cultural relativism under anthropological analysis defines every single culture with some aspect of worth as viewed by an individual within that society. Franz Boas, termed the “Father of American Anthropology”, first introduced the concept of cultural relativism. He wanted people to understand the way certain cultures conditioned people to interact with the world around them, which created a necessity to understand the culture being studied. In my words, cultural relativism is the concept that cultures should be viewed from the people among that culture. When studied by anthropologists, cultural relativism is employed to give all cultures an equal
In simple words, relativism is the thought that all beliefs and self-truths are just an opinion that cannot be proven true or false. It is simply the thought that your beliefs are no greater or lesser than mine, we are equal. Knowledge is determined by specific qualities of the observer including age, ethnicity, gender, and cultural conditioning. But is relativism a reliable source when looking into life as a whole. For example, based on the thoughts of relativism Jesus and Osama Bin Laden are equal. I believe that relativism isn’t a reliable argument when talking about issues in the world today. Now, in terms of relativism being introduced to society I believe that a majority of people would adopt the concept automatically, while some would stick to their previous beliefs. Some might already believe and live by this concept while others might just adopt this concept because they don’t like the thought of conflict, then of course there are those that stick to their beliefs no matter what. I feel like relativism is appealing to some people because they just like the thought of everyone is entitled to their own opinion and that they can believe what they want. It is said that America is land of the free and home of the brave, that all people have the right to free speech. But what if you “know” that what people believe is wrong and what you believe is right who’s to say which option is true and which is false? This is why relativism is one of the most heavily debated topics today.
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. ...
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
“understanding one’s own culture and other cultures can lead to more effective action across cultures” (251) This is often the perspective of social scientists who work with people and is the result of the work of anthropologist Franz Boas. Cultural relativism helps us to understand that there is not "one right way" to approach many of the aspects of daily living. It is important to try to employ cultural relativism because it helps see the society objectivity, encourages respect, creates learning opportunities that could make humanity stronger, a system of niche expertise, eliminates the concept of separate, but equal. The French society drink wine with every meal, they even allowing the children to often times join. We may consider it wrong, but it is not leading to degenerate behavior, so who are we to say it is wrong. People who practices cultural relativism start to understanding values and norms of other cultures that they were not unfamiliar
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...
Culture Relativism; what is it? Culture Relativism states that we cannot absolute say what is right and what is wrong because it all depends in the society we live in. James Rachels however, does not believe that we cannot absolute know that there is no right and wrong for the mere reason that cultures are different. Rachels as well believes that “certain basic values are common to all cultures.” I agree with Rachels in that culture relativism cannot assure us that there is no knowledge of what is right or wrong. I believe that different cultures must know what is right and what is wrong to do. Cultures are said to be different but if we look at them closely we can actually find that they are not so much different from one’s own culture. Religion for example is a right given to us and that many cultures around the world practices. Of course there are different types of religion but they all are worshipped and practice among the different culture.
Ethnocentrism and cultural relativism are two contrasting terms that are displayed by different people all over the world. Simply put, ethnocentrism is defined as “judging other groups from the perspective of one’s own cultural point of view.” Cultural relativism, on the other hand, is defined as “the view that all beliefs are equally valid and that truth itself is relative, depending on the situation, environment, and individual.” Each of these ideas has found its way into the minds of people worldwide. The difficult part is attempting to understand why an individual portrays one or the other. It is a question that anthropologists have been asking themselves for years.
There are different countries and cultures in the world, and as being claimed by cultural relativists, there is no such thing as “objective truth in morality” (Rachels, 2012). Cultural relativists are the people who believe in the Cultural Ethical Relativism, which declares that different cultures value different thing so common ethical truth does not exist. However, philosopher James Rachels argues against this theory due to its lack of invalidity and soundness. He introduced his Geographical Differences Argument to point out several mistakes in the CER theory. Cultural Ethical Relativism is not totally wrong because it guarantees people not to judge others’ cultures; but, Rachels’ viewpoints make a stronger argument that this theory should not be taken so far even though he does not reject it eventually.
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
Nearly all of mankind, at one point or another, spends a lot of time focusing on the question of how one can live a good human life. This question is approached in various ways and a variety of perspectives rise as a result. There are various ways to actually seek the necessary elements of a good human life. Some seek it through the reading of classic, contemporary, theological and philosophical texts while others seek it through experiences and lessons passed down from generations. As a result of this, beliefs on what is morally right and wrong, and if they have some impact on human flourishing, are quite debatable and subjective to ones own perspective. This makes determining morally significant practices or activities actually very difficult.
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