John Rachels The Challenge Of Cultural Relativism

Better 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. The three consequences of Cultural Relativism that Rachels identifies are not enough to reject the argument because the transcultural standard his examples rely on cannot be proven to exist.
Cultural relativism subscribes to the idea that all cultures have unique, individual moral codes. As legend has it, a king of Persia was fascinated by the moral differences he noticed the varied with each culture he was
…show more content…
Surveying every society on Earth and finding common threads is a way of achieving this, however it is unlikely that there will be a universal moral standard that every society in the world, in all their backgrounds and experiences, hold in high esteem. If a moral framework was presented as being divinely it would be unwise to be anything less than skeptical because there is no being without their own perspective and agenda. One rule cannot possibly apply because a person or thing capable of creating it does not exist. Yes, Relativism justifies things that are widely agreed upon to be terrible based on the belief that morality is subjective. However, it holds morality itself accountable for its worldwide inconsistencies and intangibility. Rachels and others may argue against it and they’re points are valid but it remains unfitting to judge the morality of one culture using the framework of

Related Documents

  • Decent 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
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Within that statement, Taylor is saying that there are flaws that can produced from that one dimensional view of morality. This one sided perspective of morality doesn’t allow for the equality of each individual because it is so…

    • 1852 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The first two premises already assume that all moral codes are categorical imperatives, which has not been proven itself. If each society is following a truly different moral code, it would have been up to that culture’s preference of right and wrong rather than a universal rule they are obligated to carry out. Mackie himself even argues against the validity of any moral code being a categorical imperative on how plausible this case could really be. The argument above assumes in itself that “moral codes express different perceptions of objective values, most of them seriously inadequate and badly distorted” (McKitrick, Lecture). The plausibility that some cultures have “badly distorted” views of what is universally right and wrong is not only offensive, but highly unlikely.…

    • 1437 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Moral relativists such as David Wong and Gilbert Harman have provided a more sophisticated version of moral relativism which mitigated some flaws of the inaugural and naïve form which Rachel argued against. Cultural relativism is also a relevant theory to explain the extreme cases of disagreements in our world. However, there is still invalidity and shortcomings of the cultural relativism argument that hinders moral progress, or deteriorate the view about morality into nihilistic grounds. Hence it is still essential to maintain some moral truths as objective instead of accepting the theory in…

    • 1886 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    According to David Hume, morality is something that is unable to be created via reason alone. Primarily since because ideologies are incapable of motivating us enough to act. As result, according to Hume, morality comes from emotions. Our emotions make the judgment on what is right or wrong, and that leads us to approve or disapprove of the act. We may reason why exactly or the many different scenarios where an action or duty may appear moral at first glance, what W.D.…

    • 1013 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent 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
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    A person could be the most religious, but still lack moral values. As for non religious people, they could have no belief in God whatsoever, but have the most respected moral values. Because of this, religion should not be intertwined with morals. All in all, morality and religion should be looked at as two different ideas, and should not be related in any way. The most basic views of the differences between morality and religion is natural law and divine law.…

    • 832 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Objectivism and relativism certainly have certain merits; however, the claims are simply too general and unfocused to be considered as strong as an argument such as error theory. It can seem really difficult to grasp the idea that there can be no true moral claims in the world, but when one really thinks about it in terms of error theory, it makes perfect sense. Nothing in the world is ever going to be established as a 100 percent perfection or imperfection. It is quite simply impossible. For every million people who say murder is wrong, there can be one person who does not see a problem with it.…

    • 1071 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Therefore, the relativist’s claim is illogical. To add on to this argument for endorsing an absolutist attitude, despite moral relativists taking a tolerant attitude toward other cultures and their customs, the concept of ‘one should do whatever the local custom does, given all things are seen as equal’ is not purely moral relativism because it is based on the existence of an absolute norm. Another reason to reject moral relativism is because relativism does not welcome the possibility that there may just be certain universal moral values. Relativism does not evaluate, analyze, or criticize certain practices in different cultures. An example would be murder.…

    • 761 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Cultural relativism says all one has to do is check if their action is in agreement with their societal code to determine if their action is right or wrong. But what if their societal codes are wrong? “Cultural Relativism not only forbids us from criticizing the codes of other societies; it also stops us from criticizing our own” (Rachels 34). Rachels final argument against cultural relativism is that it destroys the idea of moral progress and social change. We could not say that Martin Luther King, Jr. changed society for the better as that would be judging the social standards of another time.…

    • 412 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Decent Essays