This means there is no real universal standard when examining another culture’s views and morals, as every standard is dependent on a cultures own opinion. Their idea of a universal truth in ethics is somewhat a myth; the customs of different societies are all that exist. These customs cannot be said to be “correct” or “incorrect” for that implies that we have independent standards of right and wrong by which they may not be judged (56). An example of this is say there are two friends: James likes chocolate ice cream but Jimmy doesn’t, he’s more of strawberry ice cream person. One cannot assume the claim that one flavor is better (right or wrong) then the other, it’s merely based on preference (opinion). William Graham Sumner wrote “the “right” way is the way which the ancestors used and which had been handed down. The tradition is its own warrant. It is not held subject to verification by experience …show more content…
The Cultural difference Argument is one that states different cultures have different moral values, so therefore there is no objective “truth” in morality. Right and wrong are only matters of opinion, and opinion varies from culture to culture (58). This is demonstrated through the ritual practices of ancient Greece, in comparison to the Callatians (tribe of Indians). Death rituals varied drastically, as the Greeks would burn their dead (cremation), while the Callatians would eat the corpses of their elders, as it was said to provide them with strength and wisdom (James Rachel’s). The cultural difference argument would assume the claim no cultures values are superior to the other and would not classify eating or cremating the dead as right or wrong. They believe that cultures’ views should be judged with neutrality, as William Graham Sumner stated that “the “right” way is the way which the ancestors used and which had been handed down. The tradition is its own warrant. It is not held subject to verification by experience.