Cultural relativism indicates that what is thought right within one group may be utterly abhorrent to the members of another group, and vice versa. (55) Although, having the same moral codes as a set of rules is not realistic as people live different lives and what works for us will not necessarily work for them. To begin, the standards of cultural relativism will be defined. Next, the importance of differences in cultural morals which will be outlined by the presentation of the Cultural Differences Argument. To conclude, the similarities will be brought forth that remain between different cultures.
Cultural relativism suggests that “…there is no such independent standard; every standard is culture-bound.” (56), each culture having its own …show more content…
This is a “certain form of argument” (57) which can be examined to determine the validity of cultural relativism. The basis of every argument constructed in cultural relativism outlines the Cultural Differences Argument. “From a logical point of view, it is not a sound argument” (58). The argument makes sense and can be quite persuasive, but when analyzed the argument does not follow the premises, the basis of a valid argument. For example, when looking at the point of “Is the Earth round?”, different societies will suggest the Earth is flat where as others will suggest that the Earth is round (58). From this the Cultural Differences Argument suggests that geography contains no “objective truth” (Ibid). Meaning that saying the Earth is flat is a reasonable statement to present as it cannot be perceived as right or wrong. Although we know this isn’t true and this highlights the “fundamental mistake” of the Cultural Differences Argument, which all subjects apply to this argument if different societies disagree upon certain sides of the subject (Ibid). Thus, bringing forth the possibility of a right and wrong, just without evidence to prove so as we can with the …show more content…
Although these cultures co-exist and have remained stable to allow the morals to reach the modern society. Which indicates that they must share similar moral values to survive. Similar moral values can be expressed in different ways, but found in all societies is infant care, truth telling and prohibition of murder. A common ground to be considered is the caring of the youth (63). Without this being a common moral value, there would be no youth to replace the older members of the group (Ibid). Therefore this must be a common ground amoung different cultures. The value of truth telling within a society is also important as it is the main basis of communication (Ibid). Interactive societies rely on truth telling for survival (Ibid). Societies would have to be self-dependent without a strong communication system, as if hunters were to keep food to themselves and not provide on a timely manner, the entire society would suffer. Murder is also a concern without a set moral code. Society would have to be very self-dependent as interactions in large groups would be very dangerous (Ibid). Formations of smaller groups that can trust each other may be seen, which indicates that the prohibition of murder is a necessary feature for all societies (Ibid). Therefore it is a mistake to overestimate the differences between cultures as many have the same moral basis from society to
Cultural relativism suggests that “…there is no such independent standard; every standard is culture-bound.” (56), each culture having its own …show more content…
This is a “certain form of argument” (57) which can be examined to determine the validity of cultural relativism. The basis of every argument constructed in cultural relativism outlines the Cultural Differences Argument. “From a logical point of view, it is not a sound argument” (58). The argument makes sense and can be quite persuasive, but when analyzed the argument does not follow the premises, the basis of a valid argument. For example, when looking at the point of “Is the Earth round?”, different societies will suggest the Earth is flat where as others will suggest that the Earth is round (58). From this the Cultural Differences Argument suggests that geography contains no “objective truth” (Ibid). Meaning that saying the Earth is flat is a reasonable statement to present as it cannot be perceived as right or wrong. Although we know this isn’t true and this highlights the “fundamental mistake” of the Cultural Differences Argument, which all subjects apply to this argument if different societies disagree upon certain sides of the subject (Ibid). Thus, bringing forth the possibility of a right and wrong, just without evidence to prove so as we can with the …show more content…
Although these cultures co-exist and have remained stable to allow the morals to reach the modern society. Which indicates that they must share similar moral values to survive. Similar moral values can be expressed in different ways, but found in all societies is infant care, truth telling and prohibition of murder. A common ground to be considered is the caring of the youth (63). Without this being a common moral value, there would be no youth to replace the older members of the group (Ibid). Therefore this must be a common ground amoung different cultures. The value of truth telling within a society is also important as it is the main basis of communication (Ibid). Interactive societies rely on truth telling for survival (Ibid). Societies would have to be self-dependent without a strong communication system, as if hunters were to keep food to themselves and not provide on a timely manner, the entire society would suffer. Murder is also a concern without a set moral code. Society would have to be very self-dependent as interactions in large groups would be very dangerous (Ibid). Formations of smaller groups that can trust each other may be seen, which indicates that the prohibition of murder is a necessary feature for all societies (Ibid). Therefore it is a mistake to overestimate the differences between cultures as many have the same moral basis from society to