Читать реферат по английскому: "Untitled Essay Research Paper Essay IRelativism The" Страница 1

(Назад) (Cкачать работу)

Untitled Essay, Research Paper

Essay I

Relativism: The Tangible Theory

Since the beginning of rational thought, philosophers have searched for

the true meaning of morality. Many theorists have attempted to answer this question with

reasoning, in an attempt to find a universal set of rules, or a way to distinguish right

from wrong. Some theorists believe that this question is best answered by a single moral

standard, while others debate if there can be a single solution. Cultural Relativism

explores the idea that there can be no one moral standard that applies to everyone at any

given time. The Kantian theory, on the other hand, states that a universal sense of duty,

would most benefit humankind. I believe that the Cultural Relativist theory takes into

consideration the different cultures that make up the population as a whole. The idea of

universal truth in ethics, is a myth. The customs of different societies are all that

exist. These customs can not be ‘correct’ or ‘incorrect’ for that implies there

is an independent standard of right and wrong by which they may be judged. In today’s

global community people are interacting more and we are now discovering, more then ever,

how diverse cultures and people really are. For these reasons the Cultural Relativist

theory best defines what morality is, and where it came from.

Today all over the world people are communicating in ways never before

imagined. Cultural Relativism believes that one set of morals will not adequately adapt to

the individuality of all the cultures and subcultures in the world. What this means is

that there is no one moral law that fits every situation at every time. There will always

be exceptions to the rules. Cultural Relativism leaves the creation of moral and ethical

standards to the community. The community then makes moral judgments based on its specific

culture, history, and individuality. For these reasons Cultural Relativism helps the

community, by letting the community set its own moral standards, rather than impose a set

of morals, as the absolutists would suggest. Imposing a set of universal morals would not

be able to compensate for all the different cultural differences that exist today. If a

universal moral law were to be created, what criteria would be considered? Would one use

each communities’s religion, customs, laws, educational standards, or culture? It would be

impossible to take into consideration all of the different factors unique to each

community when creating a universal moral truth. That is why Cultural Relativism is the

best solution for moral standards, each community considers all their own factors of

culture, religion, education, etc. and then create their own set of morals based on their

needs.

There are many different situations in everyday life that call upon our

moral judgment.

With all of the people in the world and all of the different situations, who is to say

that there is one set standard that we should follow on the societal level, as well as the

individual? Cultural Relativism, challenges the ordinary belief in the universality of

moral truth. It says, in effect, that there is no such thing as universal truth in ethics;

there are only the various cultural and personal codes, and nothing more. Moreover, our

own code has no special status; it is merely one among many. One clear example of this is

illustrated in the treatment of women in some countries, against the way they are treated

in the United States. In the United States women are privileged with the same rights as

men, therefore creating, by law, an equal society. However in some Middle Eastern

countries women are not allowed to show their faces in public, own land, or may be forced

to be just one wife to a man with many wives. The questions philosophers ask in this

situation is, "Which one of these cultures is morally correct in their treatment of

women?" According to absolutists there would be one universal solution. And, in this

case, there is clearly no such solution. If you were to support the United States’

treatment of women, you would have to go against many of the Middle Eastern beliefs and

moral standards. Another way of looking at it would be from the woman’s perspective. In

the United States the woman is given freedom and the ability to choose, whereas in the

Middle Eastern culture she has no rights. Is that culture morally correct for the woman?

There are just too many variables to take into consideration when trying to make moral

decisions for all cultures to follow. If we were to use a set standard we would have to

judge people and their culture. And who is to say that one culture and its people are

right, and that the other is wrong? In ancient Egypt people were allowed to marry their

brothers and sisters. In most of today’s cultures that is morally and ethically wrong.

The reasoning behind this change in marriage styles results from

scientific research. Scientists have found that over time inbreeding causes a higher rate

of birth defects among the offspring. This fact has influenced many of the

‘developed’ cultures to outlaw inbreeding. Does this mean that the Egyptians were

morally wrong because they did not have the scientific knowledge about inbreeding that we

have today? utilitarians would have us believe yes. They would state that the only moral

way to have acted, would be to not inbreed due to the

Похожие работы