Question

- 4. What is cultural relativism in ethics? Explain this idea, and its major drawbacks.

Answer 1

It is the view that moral and social norms represent the cultural context they come from.

Cultural relativists argue that cultures are fundamentally different from each other, and so are the ethical structures that form relationships within different societies. Cultural relativists assess whether an action is' right' or' wrong' in international relations by judging it according to the ethical standards of the culture in which the action takes place. A discussion on whether value judgments can be made across cultures is taking place in the field.

Cultural relativism is the ability to understand a community on its own terms and not make judgments using one's own culture's criteria. This is aimed at promoting awareness of cultural practices that are usually not part of one's own society. Using the cultural relativism approach contributes to the belief that no one culture is superior to another when contrasted to structures of ethics, law, politics, etc. It is a theory that societal norms and values derive their meaning within a specific social context.

This is also based on the idea that there is no absolute standard for good or evil, so in the culture the decision and judgment of what is right and wrong is determined individually. The definition of cultural relativism also suggests that any moral judgment within their particular culture is subject to each person's perspective. Generally, there is no ethical system that is correct or wrong. These seeks to encourage the interpretation of cultural practices that are unfamiliar to other cultures, such as eating insects, genocides and genital cutting, in a systematic understanding of the term cultural relativism.

The idea that ethics is relative to the standards of one's society is ethical relativism. That is, it depends on the moral norms of the culture in which it is done whether an action is right or wrong. For one culture, the same action may be morally correct, but in another it may be morally wrong. There are no universal moral principles for the ethical relativist— values that can be applied uniformly to all cultures at all times. The only moral standards that can be judged against the actions of a culture are its own.

Many ethicists oppose the ethical relativism concept. Many argue that while societies ' ethical practices that vary, the basic moral values underlying these practices are not. For example, in some cultures it was common practice to kill one's parents when they reached a certain age, resulting from the idea that if they joined it while still physically active and healthy, people would be better off in the afterlife. While such a practice would be opposed in our culture, on the underlying moral principle— the obligation to care for family we would agree with these societies. Therefore, societies that vary in applying fundamental moral principles, but they agree on the principles

It is also suggested that some moral values may be related historically, while others may not. Some traditions, such as dress and morality customs, may depend on local norms, while other practices, such as slavery, torture, or political repression, may be regulated by universal moral values and considered wrong given the many other variations between cultures. Just because certain practices are related does not mean that all practices are related.