Ruth Benedict's Theory Of Normality In Other Culture

Every society has its own unique cultures in which people will have different ideas of moral codes. The diversity of these cultures cannot be said to be correct or incorrect. Every society has independent standards of ethic within their society and these standards are culture-bound. Cultural Relativism has a perception in which rightness or wrongness of an action depends entirely within the bounds of the culture. This theory opposes the belief in the objectivity of moral truth. Moreover, there is no universal truth in ethics, only various cultural codes instead. On the other point of view, it has been suggested that the world should derive an objective truth in every action. This essay will argue against the existence of objective truth in

Although cultures throughout the world are distinct from one another, along with their own unique customs, there are set moral rules that every culture follows which plays a big role, in order for society to continue forward. Cultures are very different as described by James Rachels in “Morality Is Not Relative”. Cultural Relativism means that there are no set moral codes due to the fact that distinct cultures have distinct ideas when it comes to morals. For example, Rachel's supports his argument, by using multiple ways different people lived. Rachel’s points out a rarely discussed situation about Eskimos practicing infanticide.

Cultural relativism has a variety of definitions, but the main idea is that a universal code of ethics does not exist--it varies culture to culture. Rachel’s examines cultural relativism in “The Challenge of Cultural Relativism” and argues that there are commonalities of ethics throughout every culture. Rachels sections off his argument to better explain what they believe. In this piece, they argue that cultural relativism is not a proper theory. They argue that it has many major flaws, but they acknowledge that parts of theory have some truth to it. Throughout this essay, cultural relativism will be questioned, but also supported in some ways.

Philosophy 2200C Taylor Pearl Paper #1 The Cultural Differences Argument for Moral Relativism In this paper I will be discussing the theory of the Cultural Differences Argument for Moral Relativism and also the flaws this theory holds. First I will explain the general idea of Moral Relativism, followed by two examples of cultural differences that are often cited to further explain this theory. After that I will discuss what the Cultural Differences Argument is for Moral Relativism.

The Strength and Vulnerability of Different Moral Views Over centuries of fervent discussion in the moral world, there is still nothing like a consensus on a set of moral views. This essay attempts to outline and critically evaluate two moral views, namely ethical objectivism and cultural relativism. It is crucial to understand that both moral theories cannot be true at the same time as it results in contradictions, contributing to false beliefs. Additionally, it is essential that we discuss these issues with an open-mind so as to gain deeper insights from them. First and foremost, we will be looking at the prominent view of ethical objectivism.

In other words, “right” or “wrong” are culture specific, what is considered moral in one society may be considered immoral in another, and, since no universal standard of morality that exist, no one has the right to judge another societies custom (Ess, 2009). Cultural Relativism is closely related to ethical relativism, which views truth as variable and not absolute. What makes up right and wrong is determined solely by individual or the society (Ess, 2009). Since the truth is not object, there can be no standards which applies to all cultures.

According to the author, “You might as well say that the sheet of music which tells you, at a given moment, to play one note on the piano and not another, is itself one of the notes of the keyboard. The moral law tells us the tune that we have to play: our instincts are merely the keys” (C.S. Lewis, 1952, p. 10). Further, he adds that the moral sense is usually in the position of encouraging the weaker instinct but not the stronger. Lewis also rejects the claims that the moral law could be simple a social convention for two main reasons. Firstly, he states that anyone who believe human morality has ever developed should also believe that there is a standard, independent of society invents, where the society’s morality can grow closer or farther away.

Cultural relativism is the understanding of other cultures in their own terms. To achieve the understanding of the rituals used in the cultures of another, one must be able to look at them from an emic (insider) perspective. One must also be able to look at his own culture from an etic (outsider) perspective. The ability to look at one’s culture from the etic point of view will make it easier to explain the rituals to someone from a different culture, for example, rites of passage. Rites of passage are used to mark a life stage and are celebrated by tradition or religion, meant to separate a specific group. These differ in every culture and some may even appear brutal or abusive to many outsiders, an example would be a Maasai warrior must kill a lion single handedly, tattoos and mutilation after a certain milestone in age. The ones that are more familiar to all would include the courtship, wedding or funeral. According to our text, “ceremonies such as christening, puberty rituals, marriage and funerals, which we hold whenever a member of society undergoes an important change status, within the lifecycle of the group, are considered rites of passage.” (Crapo, 2013 para. 2) Rites of passage are an important part of tradition that often symbolizes a transition from childhood to teenager to adulthood and they even give off a sense of manhood to their family as well as their community. This paper will dig into the rites of passage we call marriage in the American culture, from

In Julia Driver’s 2007 piece, “God and Human Nature”, theories are discussed in order to convey a better understanding of morality and how it is determined. The theory to be discussed is the “Divine Command Theory” and Driver discusses the role of God in assessing morality. The Divine Command Theory is an example of a system that is used to define what is right or wrong, moral or immoral. Essentially, according to this theory, what is right and wrong is “completely a matter of God’s will” (Driver 2007, 23).

Once individuals and or groups are taken out of their cultural norm and placed into another significant difference between the two would generate disparages and miss interpretations of intrinsic values of each culture. As interactions between the two cultures occurs disagreements would emerge during an exchange of services and perceived normal day to day activities as each culture has produced different valid moral principles. In order to strive, the subculture that has been placed into an unfamiliar environment would have to accept and obey the majority’s laws and policies.

Rachels and Benedict disagree about how relative is morality.in one hand Rachels express that morality is not relative, because from his point of view what is right or wrong cannot be based in one society code; it is clear that what is approved in one culture can be disapproved in other, so there is no absolute true nor a single standard to follow. Rachels state that there are some moral rules that all societies will have in common, because those rules are necessary for society to exist. According to this he think that there is some universal codes that have to be maintain for a healthy balance. Benedict in the other hand believes that morality is relative.

For example schools in western culture affects how people learn. They learn how to count differently than the Indians like Wind-Wolf learn how to count they use rocks and sort them for medicine instead of using building blocks to build shapes like said in paragraph ten. In western culture, it's seen as wrong to learn your counting by having to sort for medicine or religious economies but it's seen as wrong to learn how to count for no real reason within the tribe's culture. Both these cultures think they are doing the right thing in teaching kids how to count and the other is wrong that's how the culture affects your moral sense since both cultures feel that they are doing the right thing. "Yesterday for the third time in two weeks, he came home crying and said he wanted to have his haircut," that was said in paragraph fourteen.

Introduction Every day we as citizens of this country make decisions either consciously or unconsciously on how we go about our daily lives. We make all of our decisions based on our own personal moral behavior and what we believe in. Moral rules are defined in the book as things along the lines of people should not drink in excess or children should come before self (pg. 26). One’s moral behavior is primarily based on how they were brought up and what they were raised to believe. To test ones moral behavior ask yourself whether you perceive stealing, whether it be a candy bar from a gas station or stealing someone’s purse as wrong or right.

Culture has an impact on your outlook and views of the

Writers like Alasdair MacIntyre, Bernard Williams and Philippa Foot have abandoned “the project of rationally justifying a single norm of flourishing life for and to all human beings.” They deny that ethics can have trans-cultural norms