Cultural relativism is a theory of morality, a way of thinking about moral values, principles standards etc. It’s a binding aspect across nations; not necessarily in morals but in the belief in one’s culture. Rachel and Rachel characterized cultural relativism as a challenge to our belief in universal truth (p.18). Rachels and Rachels argue that different cultures have different moral codes and that there is no objective truth in morality. I agree with Rachels and Rachels's critical evaluation of cultural relativism every society has their own beliefs on how things should be done.
in America, there is a vast array of cultural differences, Rachels and Rachels believed cultural relativism to be prominent in understanding morality. When reviewing Rachels’ and Rachels’ five pillars of cultural relativism, the grandest theme is understanding that there is no one moral code across societal borders. Everyone’s cultural code holds no special status amongst the group. The five pillars also express that there is arrogance in judging another’s cultural morals as inferior to our own.
Save your time!
We can take care of your essay
- Proper editing and formatting
- Free revision, title page, and bibliography
- Flexible prices and money-back guarantee
We as Americans, Haitians, French, Spanish, Indian, etc., have our own justifications of what is right and wrong. For some it could be as simple as leaving elbows off the dinner table and for others, it could be as complex as praying at set times during fast. In the Callatian society, it is customary to eat the body of your dead father while in Greek society cremation was regarded as the natural way to honor the dead. These two ceremonies honor the dead in their own moral style. The first thought that comes to my mind is complete ignorance in how the Galatians are morally unjust and wrong to eat the body of the dead. This is the exact effect of a lack of knowledge of cultural relativism. If I were to live amongst the Galatians, my morals would mirror theirs. According to cultural relativism, the right thing is defined by each culture in its own way. I would not have a reference to upholding a different cultural view.
Rachels and Rachels regard societal condemnation as unacceptable, according to cultural relativism, even if that means accepting universal injustice. Oppression anywhere is viewed as an imbalance, but in some societies, oppression is culturally accepted and valued. Cultural Relativism tells us that our opinions of that political “difference” is wrong. That’s the “tough pill to swallow” with cultural relativism- accepting a society's culture in the way it chooses to run its government. What may seem fair to us, and probably a wide range of societies, may not be equally valued in another society.
To conclude, cultural relativism is a forward way of thinking. I believe it breaks the barriers of cultural abnormalities and generally brings about acceptance among people. I personally have dealt with cultural differences in my own private relationships, and the lack of understanding of another’s culture brought about great hardships and disputes. Even if it means tolerating or accepting practices that are abusive. This way of thinking could actually be revolutionary across borders in learning the basic concept of empathy for another’s way of life. After reading this book, I will come to practice this belief as a new moral compass; a new form of acceptance for the many nations and views of this world. I would hope it to be that easy for the world to place this type of value on morality.
Stuck on your essay?
