What is James Rachels argument against cultural relativism?

What is James Rachels argument against 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 are the cultural challenges of cultural relativism?

Cultural Relativism, as it has been called, challenges our ordinary belief in the objectivity and universality of moral truth. It says, in effect, that there is not such thing as universal truth in ethics; there are only the various cultural codes, and nothing more.

What does cultural relativism say according to James Rachels in the challenge to cultural relativism?

From cultural relativism, Rachels argues, we can learn: According to Rachels, the fact that different cultures have different moral codes implies that moral values lack objective truth.

What is the main purpose of the article the challenge of cultural relativism?

The article “The Challenge of Cultural Relativism” by Rachels explores the issue of ethics. According to the article, moral philosophy focuses on the issues that can steer an acceptable life. The term “cultural relativism” describes the moral codes embraced by different societal groups.

Why is cultural relativism a threat to morality?

Because of this ethicists believe that the concept of cultural relativism threatens the discipline of ethics since, if values are relative to a given culture than this must mean that there are no universal moral absolutes by which the behavior of people can be judged.

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.

Is cultural relativism a valid moral theory?

Cultural Relativism is the view that moral or ethical systems, which vary from culture to culture, are all equally valid and no one system is really “better” than any other. This is based on the idea that there is no ultimate standard of good or evil, so every judgment about right and wrong is a product of society.

What is the difference between moral and cultural relativism?

The fundamental difference between Cultural and Moral relativism is that moral is more individual to a particular person. It is more down to that persons true beliefs. Cultural relativism influences people’s own personal moral opinions and so it results in consistent moral beliefs throughout that particular culture.

Does cultural relativism have practical implications?

Cultural relativism at surface level can be seen as having practical implications in helping us deal with these cultural differences. However, as explained above, cultural relativism takes a step past acceptance and tolerance of other cultures into the realm of the morally infallible.

What is ethical subjectivism and cultural relativism?

Ethical subjectivism are what people as individuals find correct, or the values a person stands for and what they support whereas culture relativism is has a certain standard of morality held within a culture or society. These both view people as being in charge