Cultural Relativism

Improved Essays
Based on Rachel’s point of view on cultural relativism, he defines it as “a theory about the nature of morality” (Rachel, pg 19). He then shows based on his definition of cultural relevance that the argument is invalid. Even if the premise is true, the conclusion does not follow. Therefore the very form of argument is a mistaken belief. Here is what the argument would have us believed. Since, “different cultures have different moral codes” (Rachel, pg 12). It follows from the facts that there is no objective “truth” in morality. Right and wrong are only matters of opinion, and opinions vary from culture to culture. Indicating that there is a culturally neutral standard of right and wrong by which we can judge between two societies. Rachel …show more content…
It is a societal norm and public opinion not just based on the individual. Society determines what is wrong and right. There is no universal moral standard that holds people in all cultures. Since there is no universal moral standard, the moral values of one culture cannot be judged by another culture, to be any better or worse. Boss indicated that cultural relativism can change within a culture throughout time. Societal if something is legal and acceptable than it is morally acceptable by society/culture. The reading of I.C Jarvie he defines cultural relativism that judgments are based on experience and experiences are interpreted by each individual in terms of their own culture (Jarvie, pg3). Jarvie contrast relativism with ethnocentrism. Indicating that one’s own way of life is to be preferred to all others. In Donnelly article, he defines cultural relativism in two type: strong cultural relativism and weak cultural relativism. Strong cultural relativism is that the rights are culturally determined. Human nature and rights serve as a check on the potential excesses of relativism (Donnelly, pg 401). Meaning at its furthest extreme strong cultural would accept a few basic rights with universal application. While weak cultural relativism indicates that importance of a moral right/rule. There is a weak presumption of universality, allowing limited local variations and exemptions (Donnelly, pg 401). These two types of cultural relativism refer to the extent of cultural variation that is allowed. Donnelly states that we need to be aware not to use quantitative measures of relativism and qualitative judgments of different cultural

Related Documents

  • Great Essays

    The Cultural Differences argument postulates that different cultures have different moral codes. Hence right and wrong is only a matter of opinions, and opinions vary from culture to culture. However, James Rachel points out the invalidity of the argument - the conclusion does not follow from the premise. Disagreements between two different beliefs does not necessarily mean there is no objective truth in the matter, such…

    • 1886 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    He notes how any society will have certain standards ingrained within its members and that these ingrained morals cannot simply just be forced aside when confronted with a separate society with differing morals. (Williams, 21) Rachels’ relativism argument and Williams’ counter argument are examples of philosophies without a universal moral truth and an argument that debases it. The case of Rachels’ relativism is a little strange in that, while the theory claims to be spreading tolerance of other cultures, the lack of a universal standard to base the moral judgements upon brings up the question of how one would judge their own moral standards. This is especially potent in cases where a culture permits acts such as conquest and genocide-acts that obviously will bring harm to others. The Nazi regime is a prime example of this.…

    • 1298 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Rachel points out in his argument three unfavorable consequences of cultural relativism. The first, states that we must not distinguish “customs of other societies as morally inferior to our own”. (471) Secondly, we can determine what is right or wrong by the standards of our society. Lastly, “moral progress is called into doubt”. Therefore, if progress means making things better by replacing old ways, then those social standards are able to change as well.…

    • 1504 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Social relativism implies the belief that moral values and norms are based off of the dominant attitudes within a given society or culture. The same action completed in once culture may be morally right to them, however, the same action done in a different culture could be seen as morally wrong. Strong relativism suggests that absolute, universal, and objective truths about morality do not exist. While on the other hand, weak relativism suggests that certain basic values and norms appear to be universal (in many cultures) but they are different in the way that they understand each of the values and norms. An example of this relativism would to have two cultures agree that life is to be valued, but each culture could disagree on what exact value they put on…

    • 1153 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Cultural Relativism is a rule of behavior. It restricts a natural instinct to judge, sort, and distinguish loosely and forbids any form of action. John Rachels’ The Challenge of Cultural Relativism outlines and attacks the theory of cultural relativism. He pays particular attention to the results of Cultural Relativism, and employs various examples to poke holes in the argument. What is important to remember is that his argument must exist under the assumption that a standard of morality that can transcend social differences exists.…

    • 1231 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Why are they useless for the moral bridge inferentialist, as McGrath claims? Because if the bridge principle is trivial, then we need to adjust NM in order for the inference to go through. We would adjust NM to NM*, the collection of non-moral facts which are necessary to get M. But, in order to adjust NM for the inference to go through, we need to use some sort of moral relevancy condition, i.e. NM becomes “the non-moral facts which matter or which are relevant to the moral bridge principle.” However, changing NM to include a moral relevancy condition makes the inference into an inference from moral premises to a moral conclusion, and one hasn’t actually answered the initial question, that is, how do we get moral…

    • 790 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Cultural and Subjective Relativism is that are no independent truths, all truths are relevant. They might be subjective; however, it’s relative. Relativism tries to show us that moral beliefs are true for us, but might not necessarily be true to another party. Cultural and Subjective Relativism is a form of moral relativism, it conveys that moral truth should be judges by the moral code of the relevance to society and culture. Cultural and Subjective Relativist like to think that society has different moral codes and the moral codes should not be compared because there is no moral measure…

    • 1164 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In James Rachel’s book, The Elements of Moral Philosophy Rachel argues that there are some major problems with the logic that Cultural Relativism is based on. In this paper I am going to argue against Moral Disagreement in which I will merge Cultural Relativism with subjectivism. CR states that the view rightness/wrongness and goodness/badness are culturally determined. What the majority of one’s culture decides is right or wrong. With that definition I would be sure this is true, but some people disagree with this.…

    • 1526 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Benedict and Midgley The thesis of Benedict’s is that moral relativism is the correct view of the morality. Benedict’s claim that every culture is different from one another. Morality differs from every culture, that’s why what is moral to one culture can be immoral to another. Which culture is right is which one is wrong? it is part of the culture points of view, because if every culture has different standards or right and wrong then we cannot say which one is the one with the total truth.…

    • 1277 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Cultural relativism may be defined as a theory that advocates the idea of subjective morality. To extrapolate, this theory entails that “different cultures have differing moral codes” and these variances are merely arbitrary. Although this is a seemingly sufficient theory, there are key issues with this school of thought. James Rachels suggests several issues with accepting cultural relativism. He criticizes cultural relativism by stating that the theory is absurd as it entails severe consequences if practiced.…

    • 841 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays