Feb 10/11 – Blog #2
Ethical relativism is the theory that suggests morality differs from culture to culture. Ruth Benedict claims truth to this and also says that it is the exact reason we have such things as “socially-accepted” behavior. We gauge what we believe to be morally right, by judging our own personal moral compass, not by what others may believe to be right. This very principle is predicated on Benedict’s argument that morality is different through every society.
Take for example, a majority of a given society favors capital punishment and opposes abortion. Benedict’s theory states that what is habitual is synonymous with whatever is normal(in a societal context). Based on her theory, we can conclude that capital punishment is right and abortion is wrong. Going solely off of her logic, it makes sense, and builds a case for her argument. Although, looking at it subjectively from my perspective, from a completely different, more variable moral point of view, one can say that it is far too vague. It could be more refined, and made a particular argument in defense of a more universal truth.
When it comes to issues such as these and particular stances that different ethicists and philosophers take, there is a clear distinction between right and wrong in each of their cases. Although, when conflicting perspectives interact, the lines between what can be agreed upon begin to blur, and that’s where one could come in and put down those pre-held notions. This is where the foundation of the debate for ethical relativism resides.
A lot of political and religious conflict still exists in the world because of ethical relativism. It has grown to become a real issue on both ends of the spectrum. Historically speaking, there have been wars started as a result of disagreement on ethics and values. Something of this nature cannot be solved with a simple poll to try and amend the situation as Benedict might be inclined to do. Rather, a more sophisticated, possibly aggressive approach is required to be able to “agree to disagree”. It is quite unrealistic to believe that everyone can come to an agreement, especially in a hostile environment where disagreement is the root of the problem.
Read more on ethical relativism here.
A Defense of Ethical Relativism
379 words.
Mind of Lucca 