Relativism

Running Head : ARGUMENTS ON RELATIVISM

The Discourse on Relativism

Name of Client

Name of Professor

Course Name

Date of Submission

The Discourse on Relativism

There are a multitude of settings , experiences , cultures , and beliefs in different localities across all nations . Relativism is the belief that particular ideas , beliefs , truths , or ethics are dependent upon the particular setting , experience , or culture upon which it is based (Baghramian , 2004 . Relativism therefore holds that the context in which actions are made is independent . The fluidity of the context determines the

acceptability and the value of specific concepts , act , and beliefs held by the population . The strength of this argument is undermined by the inability to establish global standards relevant for all . Since the limitations of cultural groups and custom makers is not quantifiable nor is it qualified , there appears to be a universal acceptance of any and all standards instead of a relativist acceptance of various standards It is this concept which will be fleshed out throughout the succeeding discussion

There are several types of relativism studied by many philosophers social scientists , and , in recent years , even natural scientists Aesthetic relativism refers to the subjectivism of the conception of beauty and attractiveness . Take for example the argument for social status . Wherein for affluent societies what is beautiful regarding the feminine physique is what is slender and proportional . However in societies where there is scarcity of resources , what is beautiful for females is regarded as plump , well-rounded and giving the appearance of being able to tap into abundant resources

Social constructivism is also a form of relativism which focuses on the emergence of sociological and psychological phenomena based on the inherent cultural relations of persons (Searle , 1995 . This type of relativism depends upon the interaction of members of a particular culture through means that are similar thus building up patterns of interaction based on a shared perspective on reality . Therefore , the conventions of persons outside of such a reality are different from their own

Moral relativism on the other hand holds that universal standards for right or wrong do not exist . Rather , the history and culture of a society determine the acceptableness of actions and decisions . Moral relativism therefore does not adhere to the universality of codes of ethics and determines that each society should be free to establish for itself the extent of right and wrong . The nature of punishable acts cannot be generalized across cultures therefore

This will focus on one particular aspect of relativism , cultural relativism . The will discuss how the variations in opinions and views are rooted in divergent cultures . In to show this , the various arguments in support of relativism will be discussed . To test the reliability of the arguments , counter-arguments will also be reflected . Applications of different theories presented will also be scattered throughout the text in to better illustrate the point of the theorists . By the end of this , the strengths and weaknesses of relativism will have been shown alongside the different viewpoints of philosophers and other experts on the matter

Arguments for Relativism

Let us take a closer look at moral relativism in the light of cultural differences . Rachels (2003 ) argues that the culture wherein an action is performed determines the validity of the action . The argument in fact takes a turn towards stating that there are no right or wrong actions per se . But only right or wrong in particular cultures . Take for example the heated discussion on female circumcision or female genitalia mutilation . This act can not be judge as absolutely distasteful and wrong and thus should be prohibited . Rather , this action should be seen as right in the cultures wherein it is practiced . It would thus be incorrect to say that female circumcision is wrong . It would also be erroneous to say that female circumcision is right . The correct analysis would be to say that female circumcision is right in the places wherein it is practiced , take for example Somalia . No outside observer can alter such a view nor does a third person have the capacity to attach moral value to the act as he or she is not part of that culture or historical custom

Therefore , actions do not have objective moral values to them (Rachels , 2003 . There are only subjective moral or truth values and it is only with the adequate understanding and consideration of the particular practices and belief systems of a group that moral value may be to an act . Moral and truth value is therefore subjective and dependent on practice and custom . This argument also leads to the defeat of the establishment of culture-independent norms . Let us take the example of Eskimo infanticide . Infanticide may be morally wrong for the majority of societies however it is morally accepted in Eskimo societies . The concurrence of the majority does not serve to establish a moral norm or standard . Rather norms in themselves are subjective and apply only within the populations that uphold such norms (Rachels 2003

Franz Boas established that the view on cultural diversity and relativism was necessary as a tool in research concerning foreign cultural practices (Stocking , 1974 . His perspective therefore served to support the arguments of Rachels . The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is one very good example of the effect of differences in cultures . This hypothesis asserts that language and the meaning makers of language are determined by the culture within which the language is created (Stocking , 1974 . A convention which is interpreted one way in a specific culture could mean an entirely different thing in another culture . Take for example the use of silence . Where in most cultures silence is uncomfortable or a means not to disclose one 's self to others , in some cultures however silence is used as a means of communicating respect for the other and thus the longer the periods of silence the greater the respect . Language therefore becomes more than a communication tool but it becomes a means of sorting out experiences . This holds for the different experiences in various cultures

One of the greatest enemies of cultural relativism is ethnocentrism Ethnocentrism is the looking down effect that persons employ when judging a culture foreign to their own (Benedict , 1934 . It was therefore argued that preferential weighting could not be had of practices across cultures (Benedict , 1934 . In to accurately determine the value of a particular action or belief , an understanding of how the native culture views such an act should be reached . But cross-cultural comparisons should not be conducted . This view reflects a tolerant perspective on the different practices that are engaged in by different cultures . Since an understanding of the motivations and bases of actions is necessary in for value judgment to be attained , then hardly any culture-specific act may be adjudged as right or wrong

Pojman (2004 ) reiterates this view through his dependency thesis . The diversity thesis focuses on the variations across cultures . The dependency thesis focuses on the attachment of various acts performed to the actual cultural basis . Pojman (2004 ) thus gives value judgments to actions as the rightness or wrongness of an action is based on the concurrence of the subject society as to the moral value of the action This view serves to strengthen the relativistic arguments as it accounts for the absolutist tendency of relativism in accepting all standards put up by individuals and groups . Pojman (2004 ) thus extends the scope of relativism into incorporating certain standards set up by majority views

Arguments against Relativism

Although ethnocentrism is certainly abhorrent and relativism does paint a rose-colored portrait of the possible interaction across cultures there are many loopholes to the arguments presented . One argument against relativism is Steven Pinker 's argument based on evolutionary psychology . Evolutionary psychology posits that the development of behavior and actions are determined by the capacity of an individual to survive (Pinker , 2002 . Pinker thus states that the variations in societies are a product of evolution and the need to survive various environments . Although much criticism has been aimed at Pinker 's theories , the evolutionary perspective has served to undermine the arguments of relativism . Therefore actions are not judged based on whether they are supported by the culture wherein they are practiced Rather , actions are judged on the basis of whether or not they serve to propagate the survival of individuals or the ethnic group

Furthermore , relativism does little to account for the natural law and the theory that there are inherent mechanisms for determining right and wrong . It even does little to account for studies and research which have shown that in general , behavior , theories , and practices are constant across cultures . Take for example Kohlberg 's moral education Kohlberg (1984 ) believed that universal moral systems should be put in place . Kohlberg studied the moral development of humans across years The results of his studies showed that morality was more a result of developmental processes determined by both biology and psychology (Kohlberg , 1984 . The research also reflected that this determination of morality was constant and stable even across different cultures and multiple populations (Kohlberg , 1984

As a result , Kohlberg advocated the establishment of moral standards not specific to cultures (Kohlberg , 1984 . This led to his struggle to establish awareness that it wasn 't enough to tolerate practices of another culture simply because one is not a part of that culture Kohlberg (1984 ) believed that established customs should not be taken at face value and higher standards applicable to all humans and different cultural contexts should be established . Such a feat was not seen as impossible what with the similarities already observed across cultures

Another criticism of relativism is its inability to stop ethnocentrism Although one of the goals of relativism is to stem the flood of ethnocentrism by promoting greater tolerance of the diversity of cultures , it can be seen that to a certain extent relativism may promote ethnocentrism . But the tolerance that relativism promotes brings with it the rejection of foreign opinions and contributions . Take for example the acculturation of a foreigner into a culture not his own . Should that foreigner dare to make suggestions as to what may be improved or modified in the local culture , drawing from both his understanding of the said culture and his experience with his own native culture , the foreigner would be rejected . What is applicable in his native culture need not necessarily apply to the culture he has adopted . He would thus be outcast for not being able to share in the culture and beliefs of the locality regardless if he truly has achieved a level of understanding of their way of life

Moreover , relativism does not encourage the sharing of knowledge and practices across cultures . Since each group is different and claims for itself practices and standards which are specific to their particular setting , the practices and standards of other cultures should not befit them . This is not the case in present societies . The exchange of ideas standards , knowledge and even technology are commonplace and have been considered valuable sources of cultural and societal progress . These exchanges have been found to be helpful even across cultures and societies not similar to one another , further displaying the universality of concepts

Conclusion

The discussions have shown that indeed relativism is necessary in not to discriminate against peoples . However , the discussion has reflected that extremist tendencies may be associated with relativism The proponents of relativism have neglected to control for the universalist tendencies of their theories . The relativism of all practices leads to a universal tolerance for all actuations . This only leads to the lack of objectivity . The dependency theory , while establishing a means of introducing objectivity to the philosophy , has not served to strengthen relativism . Rather , it has created a different variety of relativism . Objective relativism only raises the question on why concurrence can not be had in the global majority and made to apply to all participating societies . If it is possible to apply he majority views in one society then it certainly is possible to establish universally accepted and enforced standards

Extreme relativism is a dangerous philosophy . The tolerance of all things leads to the prohibition of . The subjectivity of all things leads to the objectivity of no standard or measurement or perspective But it is this sense of restraint and objective analysis of practices and behaviors that is necessary in to promote the progress not just of societies but also of the state of human welfare . More so , the biological , psychological , and evolutionary similarities of persons regardless of cultural background should be given credence . Given that people are more similar than dissimilar , the establishment of some universal standards is a desirable objective

References

Baghramian , M (2004 . Relativism . London : Routledge

Benedict , R (1934 . Patterns of Culture . New York : Houghton Mifflin

Kohlberg , L (1984 . Essays on Moral Development : Vol . 2 , The Psychology of Moral Development . San Francisco : Harper and Row

Pinker , S (2002 . The Blank Slate : The Modern Denial of Human Nature New Jersey : Penguin Putnam

Pojman , L (2004 . The Moral Life (ed . New York : Oxford University Press

Rachels , J (2003 . The Elements of Moral Philosophy (ed . New York McGraw-Hill

Searle , J (1995 . The Construction of Social Reality . New York : Free Press

Stocking , G .W (1974 . A Franz Boas reader (ed . Chicago : The University of Chicago Press

Relativism PAGE 1 ...