Essays

Within this world that we live on, there is an enormous amount of people. Each of these people belongs to different cultures and societies. Every society has traits and customs that make it unique. These societies follow different moral codes. This means that they may have different answers to the moral questions asked by our own society. What I am trying to say is that every society has a different way of analyzing and dealing with life's events, because of their cultural beliefs. This is claim is known as Cultural Relativism. Cultural Relativism is the correct view of ethics.

To continue with the subject of murder, there are many questions about murder that our own society faces. Within our own society there are conflicting views on topics such as abortion, capital punishment and, euthanasia. To some these acts are considered to be murder, to others they are necessary to our society. The point of this conflict is that even within our own society, there is a discrepancy between what is morally right or wrong. There is an exception to

every so-called moral absolute. This eliminates the possibility of Moral Absolutism, and proves there is no universal truth.

Every society integrates itself with a chosen basis and disregards itself with behaviour deemed uncongenial. This means societies will choose their own moral standards and ethical codes and, disregard actions that do not lie within the boundaries of these moral standards and ethical codes. Our moral codes are not formed by our inevitable constitution of human nature. We recognize that morality differs in every society Our own culture and environment will dictate these codes. This explains why different people have different moral standards because behaviour is culturally institutionalized.

A society that does not have laws protecting members from murder has a society where the members respect the act of murder. Within our own western society, there are laws against murder. This is because without these laws it would create complete anarchy. This is when a society respects the power of murder, it can function without laws against it.

Cultures have value systems that do not differ that greatly Cultures beliefs are different but the values that they hold toward these beliefs are basically the same. One fault of moral absolutes is that of a closed mind. These are people who are unable to accept any action that they do not believe to be moral. With opening our minds, people will find that our feelings are not necessarily the truth. Our emotions will turn into understanding. What I mean is that with the knowledge of cultural rituals or societies' customs, we will be able to accept the peculiar things they do in comparison to be own society. For example, when we first learn that the Callatians eat the bodies of their dead fathers, people in our society are disgusted and outraged. Then these people learn that this is done out of respect, with the belief that the Callatians dead father's spirit will live inside them. This gives people who at first are outraged an understanding of why this act is completed. So, without Cultural Relativism this understanding could not take place.

Cultural Relativism attempts to derive a substantive conclusion about morality, from the mere fact that two cultures disagree about it. This analogy of objective truth is wrong. First, because their knowledge of the earth's shape is just a simple lack of technology. Their ability to survive as a society is because of their moral codes and is not comparable to their lack of technology Their moral codes allow them to set up a social and religious structure, their education has nothing to do with morality. Their education is related to a lack of resources. Comparing morality and knowledge has no reflection in the disproof of Cultural Relativism. Education and knowledge are not comparable and; this analogy is wrong.

The moral code of a society determines what is right within that society; that is if the society says that a certain moral code is right, at least within that society. The Eskimos consider it to be morally okay to kill the elderly and baby

girls because they are acts practiced within their own society, for survival. To say that, we could not condemn a society for the purpose of slavery on the killing of Jews by anti semantic, is not Culturally Relative. The definition of Cultural Relativism is defined as being within their society. This is not a view of Cultural Relativism because these people are placing their beliefs on another society, the Jewish  society. This is not an acceptable consequence of Cultural Relativism.

Hence, we come to a conclusion that different societies have different moral codes. There is no objective standard that can be used to judge one societal code better than another. The moral code of our own society has no special status; it is merely one among many. There is no 'universal truth' in ethics-that is, there are no moral truths that hold for all peoples at all times. The moral code of a society determines what is right within that society; that is, if the moral code of a society says that a certain action is right, then that action is right, at least within that society. It is mere arrogance for us to try to judge the conduct of other peoples. We should adopt an attitude of tolerance toward the practices of other cultures.