From a young age, people question whether they are morally right about things all around them. Have our morals been taught to us from a young age? Do they truly exist are are they a norm imposed to people by society? Does morality really exist or is it just a creation of our imagination? The Oxford dictionary defines morality as the principles concerning a person being able to distinguish between right and wrong and good and bad behavior. Still, the meaning is not as clear as it seems. In the arguments presented by both Jesse Prinz and James Rachel both have a understandable point about morality however, Prinz argument for moral relativism is able to stand strongly against Rachel 's anti-relativist arguments.
Jesse Prinz argues that morality is a culturally conditioned response. Just like other philosophers, Prinz believes in the concept of moral relativism. The concept revolves around the idea that morality is contingent or relative to cultural values in that society. In his argument for moral relativism, he claims that the morality held by various groups can all be true, the difference between them is the way in which it’s view by the world around them or those who don 't have or come from the same cultural values. Prinz states how objectivists, who argue against cultural relativism, believe that knowing what is wrong and what is rights depends on a universal rule rather than cultural values. The disagreement between the ideas of both the relativist and objectivist is argued by Prinz...
... middle of paper ...
...ctive truth however, there is a disagreement about the “truth”.
All in all, morality is viewed differently all around the world. In some western societies, it is okay for one to let a homeless person die from hunger and cold weather while in others, that is seen as something that is morally wrong. Still, even when one knows something is morally incorrect, one would still act the same way because it’s the most convenient and effective decision at the time. Dropping the bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki during WWII was one of the options the U.S. had. However, because it was in the best interest of the U.S., it would have decreased the amount of casualties for the U.S. and Allies, the decision to drop the bomb was made. Many of the moral decisions made by people might not right, however, as explained by both Rachel and Prinz they are the best option for people at the time.
Need Writing Help?
Get feedback on grammar, clarity, concision and logic instantly.Check your paper »
- In his essay, “The Challenge of Cultural Relativism,” James Rachels argues that cultural relativism is an unsatisfactory moral theory because it is based upon an invalid argument, if cultural relativism were true, this would have some troubling and implausible consequences, and there are some moral rules common to all societies. In this short paper, I will argue that moral objectivism is a more satisfactory moral theory than ethical relativism. Vaughn first defines ethical relativism by stating that moral standards are not objective, but are relative to what individuals or cultures believe (Vaughn 13).... [tags: Morality, Ethics, Culture, Cultural relativism]
1031 words (2.9 pages)
- The Challenge of Cultural Relativism Argument The Challenge of Culture Relativism written by James Rachels argues the downsides and upsides to the idea of Cultural Relativism. This is the idea of Cultural Relativism: the principle that an individual human 's beliefs and activities should be understood by others in terms of that individual 's own culture. It was established as axiomatic in anthropological research by Franz Boas in the first few decades of the 20th century and later popularized by his students.... [tags: Culture, United States, Anthropology]
993 words (2.8 pages)
- ... What is right for one society could be unmoral for another society; the moral code for one society establishes what is right for only that society, we cannot assume that the moral code upholds to every society. Since, every society has different moral codes, then we should be open-minded instead of ignorant of other codes, and we should not automatically assume that our moral code is better than someone else’s this proves ignorance that we are trying to shy away from. However, since there is no universal truth in ethics, how can we determine if an action is right or wrong.... [tags: Morality, Ethics, Human, Culture]
872 words (2.5 pages)
- Consequentialism is a moral theory which is founded on the premise that an action is morally right if the outcomes of such actions maximize the good and minimize the bad. In contrast, Non-consequentialism is derived from the premise that some actions are inherently right or wrong. As these theories can derive either identical or varied conclusions in morally ambiguous situations, the conclusions in themselves, while important, can not be considered evidence for the theory’s value. Hence, as we can only judge a theories value by its premise, I will argue that consequentialism is derived from a sound premise, while non-consequentialism is based on an unfounded assertion.... [tags: morality, ethics, consequentialism]
1578 words (4.5 pages)
- In this paper I will argue that cultural relativism is a weak argument. Cultural relativism is the theory that all ethical and moral claims are relative to culture and custom (Rachels, 56). Pertaining to that definition, I will present the idea that cultural relativism is flawed in the sense that it states that there is no universal standard of moral and ethical values. First, I will suggest that cultural relativism underestimates similarities between cultures. Second, I will use the overestimating differences perspective to explain the importance of understanding context, intention and purpose behind an act.... [tags: Morality, Cultural relativism, Culture, Ethics]
900 words (2.6 pages)
- ... We cannot preserve the intelligibility of moral criticism and discourse it there is no higher morality or some common, or “ultimate,” standard across all cultures. If there is no sort of higher moral principle, we also cannot allow for the evaluation of the quality and substance of a society’s moral life (Spinello). It is plausible to suggest that a society in which there is no ultimate “right” or “wrong,” it loses the ability to make any judgements whatsoever. For example, crimes such as murder or rape demand a moral judgement, but cultural relativists cannot say that these sort of crimes are always wrong.... [tags: Morality, Cultural relativism, Ethics]
761 words (2.2 pages)
- ... Unconditional intercultural tolerance would appear the most morally progressive stance to take, as humanity has intuitively realized it is wrong to impose one’s views onto others. But where would the line be drawn. To uphold such tolerance would mean that a society that views genocide to be morally sound would be equally validated in their convictions as a society that believes genocide is morally deplorable. To allow for the massacre of millions of people because we must have cultural tolerance would be erroneously dangerous for humanity.... [tags: Morality, Cultural relativism, Moral relativism]
936 words (2.7 pages)
- ... “The ‘right’ way is the way which the ancestors used and which has been handed down. The tradition is its own warrant. It is not held subject to verification by experience. The notion of right is in the folkways” (Sumner, 1960). Sunmer is explaining that since morality comes from folkways (traditions) relative to the culture from where they occur, morality is relative to culture. Opponents of Cultural Relativism argue that if Cultural Relativism is true, a society loses its abilities to intervene in external activities.... [tags: Morality, Cultural relativism, Culture]
1275 words (3.6 pages)
- In our current time where diversity is highly valued and sought after by many institutions I believe that relativism poses the greatest challenge to ethics. I love diversity and being exposed to new and different cultures but I can’t help but notice that by actively praising the planet’s diversity we may be creating a kind of tolerance for some behaviors that are not moral because we wish to avoid creating a kind of culture war. We don’t want to appear intolerant so we tolerate everything. This poses a problem because some cultures may maintain their immoral practices simply because they don’t know any better.... [tags: Morality, Ethics, Culture, Relativism]
1094 words (3.1 pages)
- Moral relativism, as Harman describes, denies “that there are universal basic moral demands, and says different people are subject to different basic moral demands depending on the social customs, practices, conventions, and principles that they accept” (Harman, p. 85). Many suppose that moral feelings derive from sympathy and concern for others, but Harman rather believes that morality derives from agreement among people of varying powers and resources provides a more plausible explanation (Harman, p.... [tags: Philosophy ]
1958 words (5.6 pages)