Moral Theory: Cultural Relativism

In a fast shrinking sympatheticity in that respect is very little that a society mass do to spread over from the scrutiny and understandingal eyes of former(a)s. The media and the Internet make it very short for the rest of the world to know of some(prenominal) indiscretion or any wrongdoing committed by a person or a group of individuals. The problem with judging others though is non as undecomposable as it may seem. There is entirely if no universal district to be followed when it comes to some of the more than complex ethical takingss such as euthanasia, abortion, recreational drug use, etc. Determining what is justifiedly and wrong, in this juvenile age, has been simplified to a lesson relativism never before seen since the Western field accepted religion as a standard for living right.The view that no oneness butt joint judge others especially those coming from a different culture is also known as ethnic relativism. This is rooted, in a more general sens e, to a concept called righteous relativism. This makes the discourse more complicated be hasten according to Timmons, relativism, is used as a punctuate for a quite a variety of views and ideas that differ in weighty ways (2002, p. 38). Timmons adds, that relativism should be understood from the following perspective, rightness or wrongness of actions ultimately depends on the moral code of the culture to which one belongs (2002, p. 38).The PositiveBased on the above-stated definition the proponent can glean at least threesome ideas that can go in support and against pagan relativism. When it comes to those in prefer of relativism then the following be easy to adhere to1.Cultural relativism allow other groups of population to experience a degree of liberty that they so pray without the interference of outside forces who may not have a distinct understanding of what they argon doing.2.Cultural relativism makes a person outside the cultural field of honor to hark bac k the insiders the realize of the doubt which in some crusades is needed to give other people room to explain themselves or to execute a plan to its completion.3.Cultural relativism allows for healthy boundaries. This means that other nations or other people groups would do well to mind their own phone line.The NegativeNow when it comes to the other side, one can also easily find that on that point are 2 sides to all(prenominal) idea. When it comes to cultural relativism the negative connotation is ambivalence that at best leads to unstableness and at worst will lead to chaos as explained in the following1.Cultural relativism allows for excuses when in feature what is needed is responsibility.2.Cultural relativism allows gross misbehavior that can often lead to violence, violation of human rights etc.3.Cultural relativism can be the cause of misunderstanding that can escalate to war and other international incidents.Expounding on the ideas described above it is better to beg in from the dictatorial side of cultural relativism. It is a common contention that cultural relativism is a go down that one should take when discussing the fiendishs of legalism the familiar scene when those who are in a position to demand conformity abuses their power and forces others to follow. The dogmatism and legalism that came from religion is a awed reminder that without a proper view of cultural relativism then there are interest groups who will impose harsh laws and statutes that would make it unattainable for others to follow.With regards to the second point, there are cases wherein people groups and all the same individuals need the benefit of the doubt from others in methodicalness for them to in fully express themselves or even to execute a plan to perfection. The Western mindset can notice the oriental mindset but there are times in history when the Western World could have benefited from the wisdom of some Asian practices if they safe took the time to gi ve them the benefit of the doubt. Americans for instance ridiculed some of the business practices of post-war Japan and later found out that their way of doing amours allow them to score quality products that even surpassed the competition.With regards to the third point, there is no need to expect further and begin examining U.S. foreign policy and the way it has been criticized all over the world. There can be good reasons why the mighty united States of America is meddling with the affairs of other countries. But the reaction is already evident in the now infamous September 11 and the Iraq debacle.Understanding, the positive side of cultural relativism would do well to heal conflicts between two different groups but at the same time too lots of a good thing can also backfire. Moral turn can spell chaos, disaster, and tyranny. With regards to the premier idea as to why cultural relativism must be opposed a case study was presented by the sociologist James Q. Wilson in sharin g an experience he had with his class. Details are shown in the following pages.According to Wilson, he had an interesting and somewhat disturbing parole with his students in the subject of relativism. He said that the students in reaction to the issue of the holocaust asserted an extreme form of relativism in that they refused to acknowledge that the evil that was the holocast.This is very effective for Wilson and the proponent of this study agrees with him. There is clearly a demarcation line between allowing room for cultural relativism and simply tour a blind eye towards something as significant as the take of sextet trillion people. This is an ex axerophtholle as to how cultural relativism can be taken too far.Furthermore, the two points raised concerning the negative aspect of cultural relativism can also be seen in the case study presented by Wilson. Cultural relativism can result in behavior that is destructive and offensive for the general public. In this case a grou p of people the Nazis were assumption blanket authority to harm fellow Germans, who happened to be Jews. This is the disturbing thing about relativism. The Jews who were massacred were not people belonging to some other nation. They were in fact Germans, with valid citizenship who happened to belong to a particular heritage or to a particular religion. Yet, the Nazis did not consider this and instead went on to murder their own.On the third and last point, cultural relativism can be allowed but only on certain terms. If cultural relativism is allowed without boundaries, it can result in something as serious as a world at war. And the Nazis rise to power is the case in point. The German people allowed this group of radicals to dictate their politics and their moral code. So at the end they were forced to pay a conscienceless price for it. Even today their history is tainted with the blood of six million Jews and it is more jarring that some of them are trying to eat the stigma by using cultural relativism, an idea that was seen in full bloom in Mr. Wilsons class.ConclusionCultural relativism, an idea rooted in moral relativism is a view that in essence encourages respect and creating boundaries in relations with people coming from a different social background and culture. This simply means that relativism allow for a more understanding environment, a world where people learn to be more gracious and open mind when it comes to other peoples actions. Those who agree with cultural relativism points to the necessity of first understanding the other persons social background, culture, and the details of the tidy sum that made him or her do something even as disturbing as the holocaust.This view plays an important role in creating a world more open to discussion and less prone to hostility. But there is another side to cultural relativism that can create the same set of problems that it hoped to solve. Those who are espousing cultural relativism aims for a gl obal society that is more humane, more gentle and more open to discussion. The opposite can happen as seen above.The account statement can be partly seen in the analysis of Catherine Wilson who remarked that in order to perform, just and benevolent actions, to approve just and benevolent actions in others, and to connect merit to those who perform them requires a social system that regards actions as items for judgment and criticism (2004, p. 4). In other words this world cannot function having only cultural relativism as a guide. Humanity requires something more stable than just a simplistic answer such as relativism.Relativism is like a band-aid to something as serious as gangrene. One can simply set up up a festering wound denying the fact that something is rotting underneath hoping to show that everything is fine will not solve the problem. The sociologist James Wilson was right to be appalled by the naivete and simplistic formulations of his class. Six million people murde red not including millions more who suffered in death camps could not be simply be dismissed as part of freedom of expression based on the unique circumstances surrounding the event.It is the tip of hypocrisy for the students to turn a blind eye from the suffering of Jews in Word War II and yet become so ashen when others are violating their own freedom. How come they can easily allow the Nazis to tread down the rights of the Jews when they could not stand their own parents telling them what to do. This is simply inconsistent and goes against human nature. Cultural relativism can be allowed in areas where cultural preferences and highly problematic issues are at stake but not when lives are on the line and especially when heinous crimes were committed. ReferencesDreier, L. (2005). Contemporary Debates in Moral Theory. Malden, MA Blackwell Publishers.Posner, R. (1999). The Problematics of Moral and Legal Theory. Boston, MA First HarvardUniversity Press.Soccio, D. J. (2004). Arche types of Wisdom An Introduction to Philosophy. fifth Ed. Belmont,CA Wadsworth.Sorell, T. (2000). Moral Theory and Anomaly. Malden, MA Blackwell Publishers.Timmons, M. (2002). Moral Theory An Introduction. Maryland Rowman & LittlefieldPublishers.Wilson, C. (2004). Moral Animals Ideals and Constraints in Moral Theory. New York OxfordUniversity Press.