The Role Of Individuality In The Works Of Marcus Tullius Cicero

Mary Midgley, in her Trying Out One’s New Sword, argues against moral isolationism, which she defines as a position where, “Moral judgement…is a kind of coinage valid only in its country of origin” (161). She notes that supporters of this ethical theory view moral isolationism as a way to be respectful and tolerant of other cultures. In addition, holding this opinion about morality means that no one can understand any culture except their own, and thus, cannot make judgements of other culture’s moral standards. In this paper, I present one of her arguments and her reasoning in support of her premises. Then, I will provide an objection to her argument. Finally, I assess that objection, arguing that it does not show her argument against moral

Moral isolationism is the idea that someone can never fully understand and comprehend any other person’s culture except their own well enough to make a moral judgement on it. As a result, it is not morally right or just for us, the people of many different societies around the world, to judge one another based on their customs and traditions that transpire from their culture. When Mary Midgley talks about the topic or moral isolationism she defines these judgements we make towards one another as, “forming an opinion, and expressing it if it is called for.” (Midgley 26) Many people disagree with this ideal of moral isolationism, including Midgley. She, as well as many others, think that one should be able to judge another culture if that

Individuals of the same ethnic background share the same culture a factor that explains that there, as many cultures as there are ethnic backgrounds across the world. Globalization has, however, led to interaction of people from varied cultural backgrounds. Because of the interaction, globalization has been accused of limiting cultural diversity. It is, however, not the case in reality. The purpose of this paper is to analyze some of the factors that justify that globalization has not limited cultural diversity as its critics say. Thus, globalization should not be viewed as a hindrance to cultural diversity because the best subject of moral concern should be the individual person and not the nation, community or the society.

People that believe in moral isolationism believe that the only way to respect a culture is if we don’t make any judgements or criticisms about it. Mary Midgley says, “Nobody can respect what is

In our country, someone who likes to be helpful is considered a model citizen, whereas in his own country he would be considered “abnormal” (Benedict p.2). Benedict used this example.to argue that like behavior, morality is culturally determined and that what can be morally right for one society can be considered morally wrong for another (Newton, Evaluating Cultural Relativism).

The thesis of meta-ethical cultural relativism is the philosophical viewpoint that there are no absolute moral truths, only truths relative to the cultural context in which they exist. From this it is therefore presumed that what one society considers to be morally right, another society may consider to be morally wrong, therefore, moral right's and wrongs are only relative to a particular society. Thus cultural relativism implies that what is 'good' is what is 'socially approved' in a given culture. Two arguments in favour of cultural relativism are the 'Cultural Differences argument' and the 'Argument from the virtue of tolerance', the following essay will look at and evaluate both of these

Both Marcus Aurelius and Cicero try to create a guide, based on their stoic views, on how a person is supposed to live a purposeful life. Marcus Aurelius was an emperor and Cicero was a politician, so both serve somebody or something. In Cicero’s “On Friendship” he bases his guides on what he has learned from important people in his life. In Marcus Aurelius’ “Meditations” he bases his guide off of what he has learned as an emperor with stoic views. Some of what he Aurelius has learned is different from Cicero’s view of stoicism; an example of this is in section seven of Meditations. Section seven of Meditations is about what Aurelius learned from his tutor. He states, “Endure hardship, and have few needs; to do things for myself and not

Marcus Tullius Cicero, sometimes introduced as “Tully” was born on January 3, 106 B.C.E. , in Arpinum, Rome, he was the oldest son of two. His father was a wealthy landowner, also named Marcus Tullius Cicero. During his youth, Cicero began exploring the writings in his father's library. Along with Marcus, his brother Quintus also displayed a great interest in philosophy and public speaking. As both sons started demonstrating this interest, their father decided to provide the best education that could be found, which included them moving to Rome. In addition to their education, Rome was also an opportunity for the brothers to increase their social status.

Moral relativism is the idea that there is no absolute moral standard that is applicable to any person at any place at any given time. It suggests that there are situations in which certain behavior that would normally be considered “wrong” can actually be considered “right”. Moral relativism has played an increasingly significant role in today’s society, particularly regarding the differences between the countries of the world. This essay will summarize and explain both arguments in favor of and against moral relativism. Despite what many relativists believe, the arguments against are not only stronger, but also more accurate.

Moral relativism is a prominent idea in philosophy that asks the question “Who am I to judge?”. This question focus primarily on morals between different people and cultures. As different cultures have different values and ways of life it stands that the morals between two cultures would vary, whether it be minimally or vastly. Midgley believed it was impossible to understand other cultures’ way, and that if we wanted to remain respectful and non discriminatory then we must not pass any form of judgement upon each other.

According to Mary Midgley, moral isolationism "consists in simply denying that we can never understand any culture except our own well enough to make judgements about it” (Midgley, 322). Midgley argues that moral isolationism is incorrect and it is illogical. She argues this by saying that it is possible for outsiders to judge foreign cultures, but moral isolationism is illogical because it excludes any kind of judgment. She also exposes that judgment is tied to respect and moral isolationism excludes barriers such as intermixing cultures. I believe that judgment of other cultures is crucial to the existence of moral values. Without judgment, individuals would not have their own opinions because judgment goes hand in hand with opinion. However, when one is judging another culture, they should be aware that their judgment should be respectful and take moral relativism into retrospect. We have to be ethical and fully understand that cultures vary when criticizing another culture. If we do not understand Ruth Benedict’s belief of moral relativism, then we are not lawful to judge another culture.

The cultural relativists have offered us a view on what is the good, is depending on whether the virtue is approved by one’s culture or not. This brings us to another question—what is culture? Seemingly, people in a different country are practicing different religions so that everyone should have

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.

Cultural Ethical Relativism is a theory that is used to explain differences among cultures, and thus their moral codes. According to cultural relativists, different cultures have different moral codes, and there is no objective truth in ethics. They believe there is no independent standard that can be used to judge one’s custom as better than another’s. In his article entitled “The Challenge of Cultural Relativism,” James Rachels offers his argument against the theory of Cultural Relativism by proving the Cultural Differences Argument is unsound and invalid. Further in his article, Rachels reasons against the claims made by cultural relativists, and he argues there are common values shared by all cultures and there exists an independent standard

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.