James K.A. Smith, a Christian philosopher who in his book “Who’s afraid of Relativism? Community, Contingency and Creaturehood” offers an analysis of relativism. Smith brings the voices of three defenders of relativism, pragmatist Wittgenstein, Rorty and Brandom in hopes that Christians will embrace what they have to offer. He argues that as Christians we should not fear relativism but that we could learn a lot from what’s been offered in terms of what it means to be a creature . Christians reject relativism on the bases of absolute truth that is intrinsic to the teachings of the Gospel; it holds that God revealed himself through Jesus Christ who said “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”(John …show more content…
Wittgenstein states that language is learnt and relative to the communities in which we are practitioners in, the words within language refer to objects and are used to relate to one another. The meaning of words is relative to its context and socially constructed its meaning depends on the community using it. This is what Wittgenstein calls “the language game” he gives an example scenario of a shop keeper receiving a note with “five red apples” wrote on it and goes to retrieve the red apples but the question Wittgenstein asks is how the shop keeper knows what to do with the note let alone what to get the costumer? Here he argues that the connections to words are formed from ostensive teaching again he gives an example here of a mother pointing to a spherical object while saying to her child “ball” and after a while the child associates the spherical object as a ball. Is true to say if the mother says to the child get the ball and the child associates the word ball to the picture of the spherical object and retrieves the ball to give to her mother? But Wittgenstein goes further and asks does ostensive teaching really count as
The commentary article “Relative Speaking” by Simon Blackburn discusses the nature of plagiarism and primarily argues that current broad definition of plargiarsim should be narrowed down or confined to literal copying, by which way, realizes its own social value. To develop his thesis, Blackburn first describes how a meeting held by different religious representatives can be turned into a farce under the influence of absolutism. Then he presents a debate about the validity of banning “fox hunting” where relativism fails to end controversy but creating distractions. Finally, Blackburn ends this article with a conclusion which states that relativism can expand literature and history to include more previously unnoticed alternatives, which is
Rachels, J. (n.d.). The Challenge of Cultural Relativism. The Challenge of Cultural Relativism. Retrieved April 14, 2014, from http://rintintin.colorado.edu/~vancecd/phl
Understanding and analyzing religions are important factors of achieving a spiritual life. Christianity worldview is a worldview that guides humans towards the spiritual life. Humans are responsible to know the Christian worldview and understand its importance. This paper will discuss the characteristics of God and creations, humanity nature and purpose, causes of humans’ problems and solutions, Jesus’s identity and importance, restoration process and grace and faith importance in Christian worldview. This paper also analyzes the Christian worldview by addressing benefits and strengths of Christian belief, troublesome or confusing parts of Christianity, and influences of Christian worldview on humans’ thinking and behaviors.
The Christian worldview is centered on the Gospel and places their beliefs in the essential teachings of the Trinity, the deity of Jesus Christ, and Jesus’ resurrection from the dead (DiVincenzo, 2015). This paper will explain who God is and what he created, what our purpose and nature is as humans, who Jesus was and what he did while on earth, how God plans to bring his people back into the right relationship with himself, and as a Christian how one is to live their life with an analysis of the Christian worldview.
This paper will debate advantages and disadvantages of both moral relativism and deontology. I will argue against moral relativism by showing that deontology gives a better account of our moral intuitions than moral relativism. I will use examples from the film The Ballad of Narayam, and James Rachels The Challenge of Cultural Relativism to illustrate why moral relativism should be rejected, and deontology should be accepted.
In essay 1: Hunter considers the ways in which Christians in much of their diversity actually think about the creation mandate today, examining the implicit theory and explicit practices that operate within this complex and often conflicted religious and cultural movement. In essay 2: Rethinking Power, Hunter believes when faith and its culture flourish, it does so, in part, because it operates with an implicit view of power in its proper place. When faith and its culture deteriorate, it does so, in part, because it operates with a view of power that is corrupt. In essay 3: Toward a New City Commons: Reflections on a Theology of Faithful Presence, Hunter says The problem of difference bears on how Christians engage the world outside of their own community,
According to John Chaffee, Cultural Relativism is ethical subjectivism on a societal level. This means that each culture holds their own standards of what is morally right or wrong and outside cultures should not judge them because they have their own beliefs. Cultural Relativists suggest that this is the best ethical standard to universalize and apply to how we live. However, in the pieces written by James Rachel and John Chafee, they repeatedly point out a problems with this standard and prove that it has multiple contradictions within itself to show that it is not a fit standard to live by and cannot be universalized. Going along with the same line of thinking as James Rachels and John Chaffee and others who also refute Cultural Relativism, in the sections below each argument will be stated and refuted.
The moral action guide, Cultural Relativism, states that from an outsider’s perspective, a person cannot judge whether an action, society, or a culture is moral or amoral. Cultural Relativism argues since each society or culture has its own ideas on morality, it is not possible for an outsider to judge whether their actions or society ideals are moral or not, because what each person or culture perceives as moral is relative to where they are from. Immanuel Kant on the hand argues in his paper, “The Good Will and Categorical Imperative,” the moral action guide of Deontology. Deontology claims that there are universal rules which all rational beings are held to and that morality is derived from the duty to these universal rules. Deontology’s
In today’s Christian worldview there are many essential basics. God is the biggest element because he is the reason why there is a Christian worldview. Humanity and Jesus was created for God’s use. God used Jesus to restore humanity since the fall of humanity many people had turned against GOD. In my essay I hope to explain the importance of each essential component is to the Christian worldview and what I believe when it comes to the Christian worldview.
Cultural relativism is a concept for much debate, my essay has looked at two arguments on the affirmative, namely the argument from the virtue of tolerance and the cultural differences argument. Although the arguments are insufficient to prove cultural relativism as a fundamental philosophical truth, they do provide reasons for many people to consider themselves 'cultural relativists', and thus give the concept a great deal of merit in meta-ethical philosophical studies.
The stories which humans tell about their origins are always cherished and held in high regard. In fact, no culture has existed which has not created or attempted to create some story of origins. Every culture has had some means in which to say this is where we came from. Especially in cultures where religion found itself prevalent, the mythology of origins became not only a status or anthropology but also a theology. In which case, we find that Christianity is not alone in this struggle, though our struggle may be unique in kind. For our case, we find that the foundation of theology, specifically practical theology, finds its basis in our story of creation and origination. “One of the central affirmations of the Christian faith is the claim that human beings are created in the image of God.” Because the creation story, as cited above, claims that humanity was made in the image or likeness of God, and we affirm that the Bible is the witness to Christ, who being in human form was also made in the image of God, then it is logical to conclude that the theology of human nature rests on this imago dei and therefore the discussion of Karl Barth’s relational view of imago is critical to dissect in order for a reasonable theology to be constructed.
In tying it all together and having navigated many different paths of “worldviews” my ability to think world-viewishly has been shaped in that I was challenged by countless interpretations as to what constitutes authentic truth/reality in a postmodern world. In my quest to analyze these issues and gain a distinct understanding as to why certain worldviews present truth and reality as that which is certain—however unproven, I was forced to change the lens by which I had previously viewed various worldviews in the past. I have concluded that the only real truth lie within the Christian worldview. As Christians we are called to be committed to the truth, more so the truth of the gospel. So what is truth? Sire cites that truth is a fact that corresponds to reality. Truth is a fact that by its very nature is immutable—cannot be changed. It is prepositional. So then how should a Christian present truth in a postmodern age of new age thinkers? Upon examining various world views and encountering what they consider to be truth and arriving at this point of understanding along with the challenges which were presented in our studies I offer a brief overview of my conclusions of various worldviews whose truth cannot be substantiated nor validated, then make my case for truth/reality as a Christian living a postmodern world.
Gensler challenges against the argument of cultural relativism being “right”. Relativism can be looked at as the concept of a person of a particular society believing in what their society believes to be good or right. For example, if A is approved by society, then A is correct. This also works with using bad instead of good. Relativism is brought on by societal beliefs and the approval and disapproval within that society. Your personal beliefs are brought on by this.
Culture Relativism; what is it? Culture Relativism states that we cannot absolute say what is right and what is wrong because it all depends in the society we live in. James Rachels however, does not believe that we cannot absolute know that there is no right and wrong for the mere reason that cultures are different. Rachels as well believes that “certain basic values are common to all cultures.” I agree with Rachels in that culture relativism cannot assure us that there is no knowledge of what is right or wrong. I believe that different cultures must know what is right and what is wrong to do. Cultures are said to be different but if we look at them closely we can actually find that they are not so much different from one’s own culture. Religion for example is a right given to us and that many cultures around the world practices. Of course there are different types of religion but they all are worshipped and practice among the different culture.
“Christianity is the faith tradition that focuses on the figure of Jesus Christ” (McGinn, 1). Not only is Christianity a set of religious beliefs, it has also created an entire culture, “a set of ideas and ways of life” which have been passed down from generation to generat...