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.
What is cultural relativism according to Rachels?
Cultural relativism, the theory that what is morally right and wrong depends only on one’s culture, attempts to address the variance in ethical standards across cultures. … In “The Challenge of Cultural Relativism,” James Rachels examines the influential theory of cultural relativism and questions its validity.
What does Rachels think is true if cultural relativism is true?
According to Rachels, if cultural relativism is true, moral knowledge is: … Rachels argues that differences in custom: a. are always based on differences in values.
Does Rachels accept or reject cultural relativism quizlet?
does rachels accept the cultural differences argument/does he think it’s valid? Explain. he does not. Because different cultures might have different beliefs on if the world is round or flat, it does not make both arguments right.
What is a benefit of cultural relativism according to Rachels?
As Rachels points out, “Cultural Relativism not only forbids us from criticizing the codes of other societies; it also stops us from criticizing our own.” This brings us to a third and closely related objection: (O3) The idea of moral progress is called into doubt.
What is Rachels main objection to the cultural differences argument?
Rachels thinks it makes no sense to condemn some societies as inferior to our own. Rachels believes that all cultural practices can be tested against a rational standard of rightness or wrongness.
Does Rachels argue for moral relativism?
In philosophy there are many theories that philosophers argue, James Rachels argues the main points of moral relativism, where he describes the differences within cultures. … Moral Relativism claims that there is no objective truth concerning morality, therefore no one can draw a line between what is right or wrong.
What can we learn from cultural relativism according to Rachels?
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.
Why does James Rachels say that the argument for cultural relativism is unsound?
Why does Rachels say the argument is 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.
What is Morality by James Rachels?
RACHELS’ MINIMUM CONCEPTION OF MORALITY (a core starting point for almost every moral theory): “Morality is the effort to guide one’s conduct by reasons while giving equal weight to interests of each individual affected” Morality is conduct guided by impartial reason. a. Effort to guide one’s conduct by reasons.
Why is Morality not relative Rachels?
In this prompt the argument that Morality exists is irrelevant, contrary to our thoughts and beliefs. Everyone follows a set of moral rules. Ethical relativists disagree with this belief because, they believe that morals are distinctive from each individual culture.
Why Cultural relativism is wrong?
Cultural relativism, the opposite of the idea that moral truth is universal and objective, contends there is no such thing as absolute right and wrong. … Cultural relativism maintains that man’s opinion within a given culture defines what is right and wrong.
What is Rachels point in saying that cultural relativism implies that we Cannot legitimately judge some societies customs as inferior to our own?
Rachels says that a third objectionable implication of cultural relativism is that it calls moral progress into doubt. What does he mean by this? It implies that although a society’s customs may change, they cannot legitimately be said to get better or worse. … Some societies have better moral codes than others.
Why does Rachels reject cultural relativism?
Rachels argues that this does not follow the cultural differences argument because there is simply no objective truth in geography. There cannot be objective truth to everything, therefore peoples believes can be wrong.
What does James Rachel believe in?
He argued for moral vegetarianism and animal rights, affirmative action, euthanasia, and the idea that parents should give as much fundamental moral consideration to another’s children as they do to their own.
Which of the following is a result of accepting Cultural Relativism?
Moral codes of one society are relative in relation to others, but absolute in one’s own culture. One of the consequences of accepting Cultural Relativism, according to Rachels, is that we cannot note that we have progressed or regressed from the past.
What happens if we took Cultural Relativism seriously?
Nevertheless, if we took Cultural Relativism seriously, we would have to regard these social practices as also immune from criticism. … After all, if right and wrong are relative to culture, this must be true for our own culture just as much as for other cultures. 3. The idea of moral progress is called into doubt.
What do moral relativists believe about morality?
Unlike moral absolutists, moral relativists argue that good and bad are relative concepts – whether something is considered right or wrong can change depending on opinion, social context, culture or a number of other factors. Moral relativists argue that there is more than one valid system of morality.
Is morality not relative?
Ethical relativism is the theory that holds that morality is relative to the norms of one’s culture. That is, whether an action is right or wrong depends on the moral norms of the society in which it is practiced. The same action may be morally right in one society but be morally wrong in another.
What is Graham Sumner’s thesis about morality?
What is Graham Sumner’s thesis about morality? “There is no measure of right and wrong other than the standards of one’s society.”
What was James Rachels arguments?
Rachels, who spent much of his career as a philosophy professor at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, broke ground by arguing that actively killing a patient with a terminal illness was no worse morally than letting the person die by doing nothing.
What is Rachels reasoning requirement?
Rachels comes up with a Minimum Conception of Morality: Morality, is at the very least, the effort to guide one’s conduct by reason while giving equal weight to the interest of each individual who will be affected by what one does.” .
What is moral and moral philosophy by James Rachels?
The Elements of Moral Philosophy is a 1986 ethics textbook by the philosophers James Rachels and Stuart Rachels. It explains a number of moral theories and topics, including cultural relativism, subjectivism, divine command theory, ethical egoism, social contract theory, utilitarianism, Kantian ethics, and deontology.