Cultural Relativism : Moral And Immoral

Each person has their own beliefs but they still respect the idea that other people’s views can differ from theirs. Cultures are better preserved with this principle of moral relativism and the root of each culture is everlasting. Since there are no wrong beliefs, each culture can have practices without being criticized for how they act. Moral relativism allows individuals to be diverse in their beliefs and to further express what they believe to be right and wrong.

The link provided talks about an 11 year old afghan girl sitting on her soon to be 40 year old husbands lap. I think that this is an example of culture relativism because in the culture that they are a part of this is something that is not frowned upon and actually occurs often. In America citizens would be appalled if something like this was to happen. The article states that “the girl was sold for money”, this is also a normal thing for this country to practice upon. It is very clear from the photo that we come from very different cultures, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that just because their culture differs from ours that it is wrong. You can see that this is something that is traditionally done in this culture and something that people

In philosophy there are many theories that philosophers argue, James Rachels argues the main points of moral relativism, where he describes the differences within cultures. Philosophers attempt to prove their theories to be true, but it can be complicated because if someone proves one premise false of your argument then the entire argument is invalid. There are different types of relativisms that favor moral relativism, such as, personal belief relativism, societal belief relativism, and then there is the cultural beliefs argument. All of these topics of relativism fall into the same category as moral relativism, meaning they all have the same general statement. Which is one cannot declare what is morally right or morally wrong. Moral relativism is the umbrella term and the others are points that can affect it. Moral Relativism claims that there is no objective truth concerning morality, therefore no one can draw a line between what is right or wrong.

Ethnocentrism is a tendency to use our own group’s ways of doing things as a yardstick for judging others (Pg. 40, Ch. 2). Cultural Relativism is understanding a culture on its own terms (Pg. 41, Ch.2). The concept I favor is Cultural Relativism because people should be able to understand and recognize a different culture’s background. It is evident that everyone has different ways to go about life/culture. Coming from another country and knowing two different cultures, helps me understand two different perspectives. I am not a type of person who will judge or believe my way of life/culture is the correct one. Everyone is different, live differently, and think differently. Therefore, Cultural Relativism makes sense to appreciate more because it allows a person to understand where different cultures are coming from. When you think about it, cultural relativism is quite hard to

In chapter 19 of the philosopher, Russ Shafer-Landau’s book, The Fundamentals of Ethics, he presents an overview of the moral theory of ethical relativism. Ethical relativism is the view that there is some moral truth and that truth is relative to each person or culture. The overarching moral principle can be broken down into ethical subjectivism and cultural relativism. The difference being ethical subjectivism says an act is morally acceptable or forbidden if an individual approves or disapproves of the action. And cultural relativism relies on the judgment of morally acceptable or forbidden if a culture or society approves or disapproves of the action (Shafer-Landau, p. 295).

Would-be culture-neutral standard Rachels suggests: "whether the parctice promotes or hinders the welfare of the people whose lives are affected by it." (p. 28)

From a relativist's perspective, moral values are only applicable within certain cultures and societies. Something that may be viewed as morally correct in the United States could be unethical in Zimbabwe and vice versa. For example, in Somalia, it is acceptable, or moral for a family to kill a female family member if she is raped, while here in the United States the murder of a family member is viewed as extremely unethical and cruel. A more simplistic example of this is the fact that it is not unethical in American culture to consume beef, while in India it is viewed as unethical. The reason for this is because of the diverse cultures and their own set of moral standards. This theory states that there are many values and ideas that can be considered morally correct while disagreeing with one another. However, there are also few downsides to this theory. Relativism may lead to immorality because of opposing perspectives and cultures. Just because one culture views something as good or bad, right or wrong, does not mean this is true. This theory is based off of personal preferences and values, which can lead to conflict and clashing of values. Relativism also does a poor job of establishing an absolute set of ethics, and does not take into consideration that the values and norms of a society can change over time.

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.

Cultural Relativism stems from the concept that numerous cultures possess individualistic and varying moral codes. In this paper, I will argue that cultural relativism is deemed as invalid. In respect to my argument, I will discuss its invalidity due to four varying concepts: non-excusable and excusable actions, morality of individuals, chaos, and the fact that not forming a judgement is still a judgement.

Two main types of ethical relativism are cultural relativism and normative ethical relativism. Cultural relativism says that there are different cultures and they always have different ways of thinking behaving and learning from the generation before, and this can be seen in daily life just by how different countries do things like music, dress, and even politics. Normative ethical relativism says that there is no universal right or wrong in the universe instead it says that what is right or wrong is different from society to society and that there is no

The position “When in Rome do as Romans”, is an ethical viewpoint that is followed by many managers. This viewpoint reflects the position of Cultural Relativism, which suggests “there is no one right way to behave” as “ethical behaviour is determined by its cultural context”(textbook). This in turn, means that one is unable to claim one way of doing things as inferior, or wrong, to those of another culture. For example, as “cultural relativism stresses the idea that notions of childhood are themselves socially constructed and therefore specific to time, place, nation and culture”, it could be argued by an Australian Manager that, if in conjunction with local law and customs in the country of origin, it is okay to use child labour (textbook). Take for example, Bolivia, where child labour is “engrained” into their culture. In 2014, legislation was approved by government that lowered the legal working age of children from fourteen years of age to ten. This allowed children above the age of 10 to become self-employed workers and children over the age of 12 to take on contract work. This legislation which allows children from the age of 10 to work, was introduced by the government to help tackle the high rates of Bolivians living in poverty, with government hoping that a family’s financial burden could help be alleviated by adding another income earner. According to the President of Bolivia, Evo Morales “eliminating work for boys and girls would be like eliminating people’s

The general study of humans and their ways of life is called Anthropology. Anthropology have four classic subdivisions: Cultural (or socio-cultural) Anthropology, Archaeology, Linguistics Anthropology and Biological (or physical) Anthropology. He or she who typically had some training in each of these four classic subdivisions in fact, have connected them to one another within a large field anthropology study. Moreover, he or she can use the theoretical knowledge and findings of anthropology to solve real-world problems surrounding human beings or human customs. Anthropologist has an idea that the beliefs and practices of a culture should be understood within the context that particular culture’s background, history and current events surrounding it called Cultural relativism. The main objective of this final research paper is examining my own culture from etic (i.e. outsider’s) perspective and another culture from emic (i.e. insider’s) perspective to clearly show my personal understanding of cultural relativism. Specifically, I will examine the rites of passage in African American girls/women lived reality and effects of the intersectional race, class and gender oppression in America coupled with discussing Japanese different rituals comparison to American outlook into death and the afterlife. All in all, rites of passage are done differently and makes a difference in its own society.

Cultural relativism is one of the core concepts of anthropology. Are there any limits to this concept? If so, what are they? Is there a place in anthropology for the idea of universal human rights?

How do ethnocentrism and cultural relativism help us understand the differences between levels of development in societies?

Different societies have different moral codes. Cultural relativism claims that ethics is relative to individuals, groups, cultures and societies. Relativism resists universal moral normal. The moral code of society determines what is right or wrong in that society. There’s no objective standard that can be used to judge one’s society code against another. Its arrogant to judge others cultures. We should always be tolerant of them. Cultural relativism for many people is a response to the complexity of moral issues and the number of different responses various. Groups our cultures have given to moral issues so for many when we look at just how different cultures have responded two different issues the way different cultures. All this diversity that there seems to be a response where we want to say well, maybe there isn 't some sort of absolute right or wrong maybe morality really is just relative to a different group that different people believe different things. In this paper, I will discuss the aspect of my culture from an outside perspective and discuss another culture from an inside perspective. In sociology, the principle is sometimes practiced to avoid cultural bias in research, as well as to avoid judging another culture by the standards of one 's own culture. For this reason, cultural relativism has been considered an attempt to avoid ethnocentrism. Cultural relativism is related to but often distinguished from moral relativism, the view that morality is relative to