Cultural Relativism

[Alex_G]

To what degree do you agree with the idea that different cultures have different moral priorities and considerations?
A question that at first glance might appear to be quite simple does seem to be made of smaller concepts.

Do different cultures have different beliefs regarding ethical issues?

Do different cultures in fact have different legitimate rights and wrongs, as opposed to just different beliefs of what is right and wrong? Might some things be in fact right in one culture and wrong in another, regardless of beliefs.

What difficulties might be faced in attempting to observe another culture's practices to attempt to answer some of these questions? When one searches another culture for such ethical practices or frameworks what in fact are we looking for? Are we somewhat bound by our own culture that we seek out such things with reference to our own framework? For example, in seeking out whether another culture has a version of marriage, when we find that instead they sack women from other tribal villages, do we say 'yes they do have a form of marrage that involves the following, or rather say they do not have any form of marrage, but mearly do the following?

Finally one might ask, how much respect do we give to practices from other cultures based on any view that standards of morality might have cultural variation? If in fact someone considers all value systems to be fully culturally relative, might therefore demanding a universal rule of respect be an affront to that?

Alex

 

[Storm]

To what degree do you agree with the idea that different cultures have different moral priorities and considerations?

On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being total relativism: 9.

Do different cultures have different beliefs regarding ethical issues?

Duh.

Do different cultures in fact have different legitimate rights and wrongs, as opposed to just different beliefs of what is right and wrong? Might some things be in fact right in one culture and wrong in another, regardless of beliefs.

Yes.

What difficulties might be faced in attempting to observe another culture's practices to attempt to answer some of these questions? When one searches another culture for such ethical practices or frameworks what in fact are we looking for? Are we somewhat bound by our own culture that we seek out such things with reference to our own framework? For example, in seeking out whether another culture has a version of marriage, when we find that instead they sack women from other tribal villages, do we say 'yes they do have a form of marrage that involves the following, or rather say they do not have any form of marrage, but mearly do the following?

In their culture, this is acceptable. That doesn't mean we can't try to peacefully bring them to a healthier ethos.

Finally one might ask, how much respect do we give to practices from other cultures based on any view that standards of morality might have cultural variation? If in fact someone considers all value systems to be fully culturally relative, might therefore demanding a universal rule of respect be an affront to that?

One must walk a fine line between respecting cultural differences and doing justice to one's own morality.

 

[Dr. Nosophoros]

Cultural relativism:
You have no right to exist except which you make

 

[Sunstone]

Do different cultures have different beliefs regarding ethical issues?

To some extent, yes. Some of the greatest differences are between, say, Japan and Britain. There is an important sense in which you can say the Japanese do not have "beliefs regarding ethical issues" while the British do. So, you can find a very wide range of differences in this area.

At the same time, everyone and their dog in the sciences these days is pointing out that human nature is one (i.e. we are one species), based on DNA (as opposed to a free willing soul), and not nearly so diverse as we might think we are. For instance, you find the building blocks of morality in all cultures. They are not hand me downs from god. They are hand me downs from DNA. Those blocks include compassion, a tendency to reciprocate, a tendency to cooperate in achieving goals, territorial defense, and so forth.

So, what you have are a great many variations on a theme, so to speak. You have reciprocity in all cultures. The details may vary.

As for marriage, every one knows marriage is a publicly announce pair bond with rights and responsibilities for both parties. And anyone who thinks that is simply too vague should try researching the histories of "marriages" that humans did not evolve, but merely dreamed of doing. Such as group marriage. Group marriages tend not to last more than six years at the max before they devolve back into pair bonds.

You can change the laws all you want. Humans are going to pair bond.

 

[Alex_G]

To some extent, yes. Some of the greatest differences are between, say, Japan and Britain. There is an important sense in which you can say the Japanese do not have "beliefs regarding ethical issues" while the British do. So, you can find a very wide range of differences in this area.

At the same time, everyone and their dog in the sciences these days is pointing out that human nature is one (i.e. we are one species), based on DNA (as opposed to a free willing soul), and not nearly so diverse as we might think we are. For instance, you find the building blocks of morality in all cultures. They are not hand me downs from god. They are hand me downs from DNA. Those blocks include compassion, a tendency to reciprocate, a tendency to cooperate in achieving goals, territorial defense, and so forth.

So, what you have are a great many variations on a theme, so to speak. You have reciprocity in all cultures. The details may vary.

As for marriage, every one knows marriage is a publicly announce pair bond with rights and responsibilities for both parties. And anyone who thinks that is simply too vague should try researching the histories of "marriages" that humans did not evolve, but merely dreamed of doing. Such as group marriage. Group marriages tend not to last more than six years at the max before they devolve back into pair bonds.

You can change the laws all you want. Humans are going to pair bond.
[/font][/color]

Thanks for the response man. I agree with the things you say, and this subject for me at least, often seems to be one of those that is all too easily brought up in such pseudo-intellectual dinner parties, delivered in such ways fraught with bad thinking, even if at the heart there is some valuable truth to be found. Such made it a point of interest for me, and thus a thread.

I guess evolution is always going to pop into this, as biological causal factors for behaviour. Much work in game theory is quite interesting too, with calculated behaviour patterns or strategies that provide the best payoffs sometimes mimic certain ethical behaviours we as humans do indeed possess.

And also, i think there is probably many examples and situations that at first glance might seems to vary significantly between 2 cultures, but with deeper probing, you find that similar ethical principles underlie both. An example might be, one culture that eats their loved one when they die, and another that cremates them. Although on the face of it they may be quite different in practice, they may very well be acting under similar principles of respect for those lost. Maybe each understanding the facilitation of a path to the afterlife differently, and thus having different commitments. A difference in the interpretation of facts rather than values per say.

Alex

 

[Alex_G]

On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being total relativism: 9.


Duh.


Yes.


In their culture, this is acceptable. That doesn't mean we can't try to peacefully bring them to a healthier ethos.


One must walk a fine line between respecting cultural differences and doing justice to one's own morality.

Thanks for the response

So in supporting the idea that culturally different ethical frameworks can be or are equally valid, to what do you refer when you say we can try to peacefully bring them to a healthier ethos?

I agree, there is a balance that must be upheld with regards to respect and self expression as it were.

Alex

 

[Storm]

Thanks for the response

So in supporting the idea that culturally different ethical frameworks can be or are equally valid, to what do you refer when you say we can try to peacefully bring them to a healthier ethos?

I agree, there is a balance that must be upheld with regards to respect and self expression as it were.

Alex

Well, it's complicated. I don't believe all cultural imperatives are equally beneficial. The example you gave of marriage being based on rape would be a shining example. In the human struggle for morality, some ideas will be better than others. We have a moral (and divine) imperative to fight for what we believe in.

 

[Alex_G]

Well, it's complicated. I don't believe all cultural imperatives are equally beneficial. The example you gave of marriage being based on rape would be a shining example. In the human struggle for morality, some ideas will be better than others. We have a moral (and divine) imperative to fight for what we believe in.

Yeah it is indeed a complicated matter! I slightly regret my random marriage example, as it wasnt really regarding the content of what i was saying, it was just to illustrate how definitions for things in different cultures and languages can encounter problems of translation, and thus identification.

Alex