Rachels refers to this as the “Cultural Differences Argument” (58). He claims that it is unreasonable to conclude that there is no ‘objective truth
What is Rachels critique of Cultural Relativism?
Rachels states that Cultural Relativists would say eating the dead is neither objectively right nor wrong because eating the dead is a matter of opinion. Rachels argues that this argument is not valid because the premise simply does not follow the conclusion.
What is Rachels main objection to the cultural differences argument?
What is Rachels’ objection to the cultural differences argument? a. The main premise is false and therefore the argument is unsound .
Is James Rachel’s argument against Cultural Relativism?
Philosopher James Rachels has done a careful analysis and appraisal of cultural relativism in his modern classic entitled The Elements of Moral Philosophy. One of Professor Rachels’ key points is that cultural relativism is based on a faulty argument which he calls the cultural differences argument.
Why does Rachels claim that the cultural differences argument is not a good argument do you agree with him?
cultural differences argument-different cultures have different moral beliefs so there is no absolute truth with regard to moral beliefs. ... this makes the argument invalid. Rachels argues that many cases in which societies seem to have a moral disagreement are best explained by disagreements which are not moral at all.
Why is the cultural differences argument unsound?
cultural differences argument-different cultures have different moral beliefs so there is no absolute truth with regard to moral beliefs . however, because different cultures have different geographical beliefs, there is no absolute truth with regard to geographical beliefs. this makes the argument invalid.
What is the conclusion of the cultural differences argument?
Rachels refers to this as the “Cultural Differences Argument” (58). He claims that it is unreasonable to conclude that there is no ‘objective truth’ in morality simply because people in different societies disagree on what is moral . It is entirely possible that the parties in question are simply mistaken, however.
What are the dangers of cultural relativism?
Accepting this moral wrong because of moral relativism based on culture is dangerous as it leads to indifference . If we cannot judge and moral rightness depends on certain cultures, then “anything goes”. Moral relativism leads to moral paralysis and indifference.
What can we learn from cultural relativism?
Cultural relativism is the ability to understand a culture on its own terms and not to make judgments using the standards of one’s own culture . ... Using the perspective of cultural relativism leads to the view that no one culture is superior than another culture when compared to systems of morality, law, politics, etc.
What are the strengths and weaknesses of cultural relativism?
The strength of cultural relativism is that it promotes greater diversity and understanding of ethical differences and reduces the likelihood of an imperialist imposition of values. The weakness of cultural relativism is its propensity towards quietism which may compromise action to protect human rights.
What are the limits of cultural relativism?
Nevertheless, there are also limits to cultural relativism. Human right, freedom, and justice are few examples of those limits. People are taught to respect other cultures and traditions, but they also need to be ready to criticize when the cultural practices or traditions infringe upon human rights or justice.
Why is relativism wrong?
The problem with individual moral relativism is that it lacks a concept of guiding principles of right or wrong . ... While thinkers of cultural relativism are clear that it is wrong to impose one’s own cultural values over another, some cultures hold a central value of intolerance.
What are the dangers of relativism?
Everything revolves around the truth. That’s the reason why moral relativism is so dangerous. It denies moral reality; it is moral cowardice masquerading as an ‘everybody wins’ solution. Moral relativism erodes excellence, virtue, peace, order, and justice , and casts the world and everyone in it into chaos.
What are the premises of the cultural differences argument according to Rachels Why is there less disagreement among cultures than it seems?
Why does Rachels think that there is less disagreement between cultures than there seems to be? While each culture has their own customs, they usually reflect the same morals . For example, two different cultures have customs when it comes to handling the dead but both customs have the end goal of respecting them.
Do all cultures have some values in common?
All cultures have characteristics such as initiations, traditions, history, values and principles, purpose, symbols, and boundaries.
What is the Provability argument?
The provability argument. If there were such thing as objective truth we should be able to prove that some moral opinions are true and others false . But we cannot prove that some moral opinions are true and others false, so there is no such thing ad objective truth in ethics.
