1. How does Pojman link ethnocentrism to relativism?
Pojman first gives the definition of ethnocentrism, explaining that it is basically the belief that your own culture is superior, similar to racist belief we have seen in this country for many years that suggests that whites are superior to any other race. Ethnocentrism is believed to be a bad thing. As we have accepted this belief we grow more accepting of the idea that there are no morals that are superior to others, nor rights or wrongs, moral relativism. Pojman connects these opposing beliefs by showing that people do not solely believe in ethnocentrism or relativism, but a mixture of both, even though people would rather define themselves as relativists. There is a certain pride that …show more content…
Since one cannot unbiasedly judge the morality of another culture, they should be tolerant of the morals another culture chooses to accept as the culture they belong to also has morals they may choose from. Pojman, however, disagrees with Herskovits, explaining that tolerance of each culture is not something that ought to happen without reason. Relativists often do not have a reason for tolerance but are not accepting of intolerance according to Pojman. The actions of a French citizen who detonates a bomb in a crowded tourist attraction, say the Louvre, would have to be accepted as morally correct should that be a commonly accepted principle in France This is an example of Pojman’s connection between cultural relativism and tolerance. I think it is hard enough for a culture to distinguish its own moral principles that finding morals that suit the majority of their citizens is something that should happen before discussing tolerance of the moral principles of other cultures. If someone who lives in the United States does not share the morals that are commonly accepted by the majority to US citizens, does that mean they should uproot their life to find a culture that better suits their moral principles? If this happened each person would know they are living in a culture that is perfect for them and should not be bothered by what the other cultures are
Pojman first gives the definition of ethnocentrism, explaining that it is basically the belief that your own culture is superior, similar to racist belief we have seen in this country for many years that suggests that whites are superior to any other race. Ethnocentrism is believed to be a bad thing. As we have accepted this belief we grow more accepting of the idea that there are no morals that are superior to others, nor rights or wrongs, moral relativism. Pojman connects these opposing beliefs by showing that people do not solely believe in ethnocentrism or relativism, but a mixture of both, even though people would rather define themselves as relativists. There is a certain pride that …show more content…
Since one cannot unbiasedly judge the morality of another culture, they should be tolerant of the morals another culture chooses to accept as the culture they belong to also has morals they may choose from. Pojman, however, disagrees with Herskovits, explaining that tolerance of each culture is not something that ought to happen without reason. Relativists often do not have a reason for tolerance but are not accepting of intolerance according to Pojman. The actions of a French citizen who detonates a bomb in a crowded tourist attraction, say the Louvre, would have to be accepted as morally correct should that be a commonly accepted principle in France This is an example of Pojman’s connection between cultural relativism and tolerance. I think it is hard enough for a culture to distinguish its own moral principles that finding morals that suit the majority of their citizens is something that should happen before discussing tolerance of the moral principles of other cultures. If someone who lives in the United States does not share the morals that are commonly accepted by the majority to US citizens, does that mean they should uproot their life to find a culture that better suits their moral principles? If this happened each person would know they are living in a culture that is perfect for them and should not be bothered by what the other cultures are