Cons Of Cultural Relativism

Cultural Relativism is the idea that what is right and what is wrong depends on what culture you live in. James Rachels in The Elements of Moral Philosophy used an example of Ancient Greeks and the Callatians and their disposal of the dead. The Greeks believed that the most respectful way to honor the dead is to cremate the body; the Callatians thought differently, they believe that the most respectful way to honor the dead as to eat the body of the dead so that the family would

Cultural relativism is the idea that human behavior, ideas, and emotions must be understood in the context of the whole culture in which they occur.

Cultural Relativism is an important ethical theory and James Rachels’ argument is significant to provide evidence to prove and disprove the idea. It is important to call attention to and understand differences between cultures. Tolerance is also an valid concept when arguing Cultural Relativism. Regardless of the outcome or viewpoint of the argument it is significant in the fact that it raises awareness for tolerance and differences between cultures and that no culture is more superior or more correct in relation to another. The theory of Cultural Relativism is the idea that each and every culture has it’s own moral code, and if this is true, there is no universal, ethical truth that every culture must abide by. A universal truth being one that is true in all situations, at all times, and in all places. It proposes that a person’s actions should be understood and judged only by those within the terms of their culture. It is an idea of tolerance and open mindedness to cultures who are not our own. In the article, The Challenge of Cultural Relativism, James Rachels discusses important themes and arguments in concurrence with his own argument against Cultural Relativism. I will argue that Cultural Relativism is challenged by James Rachels argument but not disproved.

Cultural relativism is the attitude that an individual’s principles and customs should not be judged by others in terms that every individual has different backgrounds and beliefs. No culture is superior to any other culture as they all have different laws, or morals which they believe to be right or wrong. Everyone should be equal based on their race, gender, religion, and values. All cultures are adapted to what is right or wrong/good or bad based on their society and what they’re taught growing up. This varies from places and time frames.

Relativism is the “view that moral claims are relative to an individual or community, and do not have objective value or truth.” (Mosser, K. 2013). one society culture practice is not the same as another’s society culture. for example one society thinks that adultery or prostitution is allowed, considered to be right, and in another society it is not allowed, it is considered to be wrong. Another example is that one culture beleifs that football is the most entertaining sport to watch and another culture beliefs that soccer is the most entertaining sport to watch.

Believing in relativism means that you believe different people can have different point of views about what is moral or immoral. Focusing in cultural relativism, is the idea that an individual's belief, values and practices should be understood given that person’s culture rather than to judge against a criteria of the other. In other words, the belief that morality is created collectively only by groups of people and morality at the whole is different from culture to culture. For example, many things in our daily lives such as food, language, rules and social norms are different within different cultures. Cultural relativism is not judging a culture to what our culture's standards of what is right or wrong, instead we should understand different cultures in its own cultural context. For example, instead of thinking, “eating grasshoppers are gross” we should instead think, “why do cultures such as china eat grasshoppers?”. You may learn that grasshoppers and many other insects are rich in protein and easy to farm. You have no right to judge or punish anybody in a relativistic society. What is right or wrong is defined by socialization. All over the world

Moral Relativism is generally used to describe the differences among various cultures that influence their morality and ethics. According to James Rachels, because of moral relativism there typically is no right and wrong and briefly states : “Different cultures have different moral codes.” (Rachels, 18) Various cultures perceive right and wrong differently. What is considered right in one society could be considered wrong in another, but altogether all cultures have some values in common.

Cultural relativism is the view that all beliefs are equally valid and that truth itself is relative, depending on the situation, environment, and individual. Those who hold to cultural relativism hold that all religious, ethical, aesthetic, and political beliefs are completely relative to the individual within a cultural identity. Cultural relativism (CR) says that good and bad are relative to culture. What is "good" is what is "socially approved" in a given culture. Our moral principles describe social conventions and must be based on the norms of our society.

Cultural relativism is the way society separates right from wrong within a culture. What we describe as “good” and “bad” is based off of our cultural beliefs. Cultural relativism argues that no culture is better than any other and all their beliefs are equally valid. The way that modern society is has made it possible for almost everything to be justified.

Citizens of a given culture believe that the moralities that they uphold and live by are the only true morals.

Philosopher Rachels states in his article, “The Challenge of Cultural Relativism” that morality is dependent on a society’s cultural codes, “Cultural Relativism, as it has been called, challenges our ordinary belief in the objectivity and universality of moral truth. It says, in effect, that there is not such thing as universal truth in ethics; there are only the various cultural codes, and nothing more.” To elaborate, this means that there is no certain way of establishing which actions are right or wrong. The morality of actions is depicted by what different cultures have established. This idea indicates that our societies rules are no greater than another society’s beliefs about moral actions.

Cultural relativism means the exact opposite of ethnocentrism. It can be summed up as believing that “all religious, ethical, aesthetic, and political beliefs are completely relative to the individual within a cultural identity” (www.cultural-relativism.com). This means that there is no definite “right” or “wrong”, but rather an ever-changing set of values for each separate culture.

Cultural relativism is looking at beliefs and values of a culture from the view point of the culture itself.

The three (3) moral values exists in a person are highly influenced by culture, religion, technology, economy, social and politics. These six (6) factors, inter-related each other. When a person starts a family, the spouse will share their beliefs and will possibly influce each other behaviour then they will apply the relevant values into their kids. This will be passed from generation to generation, creating a culture. The culture molded is usually influenced by religion. For example, the people who believe there is a God have a better character rather than the atheist. This is due to the respect trust and faith that they put in the almighty God. Let’s review this second stage process in the context of a small family. A family is a group. They have their own culture that being passed from generations. They usually share the same religion with each other. When the kids of the family grow older, they will migrate to other places for various reasons such as working or pursue their study. When this happened, they will be exposed to other unfamiliar culture. They are out of their comfort zone. When they socialize with other people they will think critically. This makes them assimilate the norms and beliefs of others and arbitrate of what they think the best for them. At this point the value that they hold is not the same as their parents anymore. They will mingle around those who share almost the same values as them. Nowadays, the technological singularity

Moral values and some profound qualities are the conviction or distinguish factor that certain practices are either great or terrible. A few ethics are not difficult to acknowledge and just the edges of social order may address or reject them. It is sheltered to expect that the moralities in human culture are intrinsic and inward inside us. What I mean is that the system that makes profound quality is incorporated with our heredity. Ethics are liable to an extensive variety of provisions and extremes and some societal moralities might be made from untruths and false convictions. What was once moral, for instance subjugation, is no more good today and subsequently we proceed onward to a more common and good human culture. Moral values cannot be much imposed on any one. Moral values are ethical quality is a generally acknowledged moral guideline that legislates the regular living of life. These standards are imperative in keeping up solidarity, amicability and respect between individuals. Good values are typically collective and imparted by people in general by and large, accordingly if there is no assertion around group parts no ethical qualities will be secured.