Module 2: Moral Relativism

Question 1

What makes up the Argument for Normative Cultural Relativism

Answer 1

1. Descriptive Cultural Relativism
2. Meta-ethical Cultural Relativism
3. Normative Cultural Relativism

Question 2

Descriptive Cultural Relativism (DCR)

Answer 2

(often based on observation)is the intuitive empirical claim that different cultures have different moral norms and differing ethical system

Question 3

Implications of Descriptive cultural Relativism

Answer 3

• DCR does not say that the moral claims of all cultures are true
• it can be true that our cultures have different moral commitments without saying that all those commitments are true or right in themselves (not a meta-ethical claim)
  -it does not tell us what we should follow (not normative claim)

Question 4

Meta-ethical Cultural Relativism

Answer 4

-is interested in the nature of moral properties; what determines or makes up the rightness and wrongness of actions and behaviour
-central thesis is that moral rightness and wrongness is determined by culture

Question 5

The argument for Meta-ethical Cultural Relativism

Answer 5

P1: Moral judgment differ between cultures
P2: If moral judgments differ between cultures then right and wrong also differ according to culture
C: If right and wrong differ according to culture then there can be no objective morality and the truth and falsity of moral claims is relatively determined culturally

Question 6

The Argument from Cultural Differences

Answer 6

the 3 key claims making up the argument for Meta-ethical Relativism(P1, P2, C)

Question 7

Normative Cultural Relativism

Answer 7

-builds from the argument from Cultural Differences to guide human behaviour and action

Question 8

Normative Claims inferred from claims 1-3

Answer 8

4. We ought to do what our culture demand as morally right
5. We should not treat moral principles and norms of one culture as having special status over the moral norms of other cultures (no moral chauvinism)
6. We ought to be tolerant of people acting under the moral norms of different cultures

Question 9

Full argument for Normative Cultural Relativism

Answer 9

Claim 1-6 is the argument with 4,5,6 being the conclusion

Question 10

validity

Answer 10

an argument is considered valid if its conclusion logically follows from its premises(has to to with logical structure of argument)

Question 11

soundness

Answer 11

for an argument to be sound, it must be both valid (logically structured) and have true premises (factually accurate)

Question 12

Is the argument from Cultural Difference invalid?

Answer 12

even though there are disagreements that doesn’t mean that there’s no objective truth about a matter. multiple cultures cannot be right at the same time
-the argument is therefore invalid(the truth of the premises-P1, P2- does not guaranteed the truth of the conclusion)
-example Tupac death

Question 13

why is the truth of the conclusion not guaranteed?

Answer 13

-two cultures disagreeing about the truth of a moral claim does not entail that both of their moral claims are true
-moral disagreement doesn’t entail that there is no objective truth about morality or that morality is relative
-given that the argument is invalid its followed by it being unsound as well

Question 14

How does the unsoundness of the Meta-ethical Relativism weaken NCR argument

Answer 14

Given that NCR argument relies on the argument from Cultural Differences, NCR is untenable because its foundations are based on a meta-ethical argument that is unsound

Question 15

how would we evaluate whether overall the NCR argument has any strengths?

Answer 15

To see whether the NCR argument is convincing overall we would have to critique each of its key claims

Question 16

critique of claim 1: There is widespread disagreement about morality between cultures (DCR)

Answer 16

-different moral practice can be based on identical moral principles
-the disagreements or differences observed could be non moral but conventional
-meaning that there are multiple universally fundamental moral values that different cultures may choose to exercise differently in moral practice

Question 17

critique of claim 2: Moral right and wrong differ according to culture (Meta-ethical claim)

Answer 17

• the argument from CD was logically untenable(unsound) so we have no logical reason to believe claim 2

Question 18

critique of claim 3: There are no moral truths that hold for all persons at all times because morality is culturally determined (meta-R)

Answer 18

-This is a denial of Moral Universalism meaning a denial of a moral principle or system that applies to everyone
-however to make a claim that morality is relative is to treat this claim as a universal moral truth
-this makes meta-ethical cultural relativism internally contradictory

Question 19

How would a Normative cultural relativist respond to the critique of claim 3

Answer 19

they could retort and suggest that this is the only morally universal claim that is true
- however this does not resolve the concern that there are other universal claims which also holds true for all persons

Question 20

critique of claim 4: We ought to do what our cultures demand as morally right

Answer 20

• Claim 4 assumes that cultures are always correct about what is morally right
• moral relativism cannot make sense of moral progress if any cultures norms are always right
• cultures are internally diverse and are often practiced differently, this makes it difficult to get guidance on what to do.

Question 21

critique of claim 5: We should not treat the moral norms of a particular culture as having special status over others

Answer 21

• this claim cannot be consistently supported
• if members of a culture have to follow that cultures moral norms it is assumed that those norms must have special status to the members of the culture
• without asserting that our cultures have special status to us, Moral Relativists cannot account for why we are bound to our cultures moral norms

implications of no special status:
- results in moral obligations being arbitrary because we have no reason act according to what our cultures demand

Question 22

critique of claim 6: We should be tolerant of people acting under the moral norms of a different culture

Answer 22

• this goes strongly against considered moral judgments and background assumptions about morality
  -a cultures different stances on morality does not entail that we should accept their practice of morally wrong actions
  eg. if a culture practices intolerance, MR would require us to be tolerant of intolerance and we would have to be committed to considering intolerance as morally right which contradicts claim 6

Question 23

Does the NCR meet the criteria for a good moral theory?

Answer 23

1. Internal consistency
2. Consistency with considered moral judgments
3. Consistency with Background Assumptions about Morality
4. Usefulness in moral problem solving

Question 24

1. Internal Consistency

Answer 24

NCR contradicts itself regarding 2 key claims:
- it says morality is relative but treats this claim about the nature of morality as a moral universal claim.
-this applies mainly to the meta-ethical claims of NCR
-NCR claims to require tolerance but would have to allow intolerance
- the theory is thus internally inconsistent

Question 25

2. Consistency with Considered Moral Judgments

Answer 25

CMJ: slavery is morally wrong no matter the reason
- moral relativists would have to be committed to saying slavery was morally right in the past
- further, the transition from slavery to emancipation would be difficult to defend as a good social reform under NCR
- NCR would treat attempts to change cultures for the better as morally wrong
- moral relativism commits us to accepting justifiably wrong actions as morally right, even though we take them to be morally wrong uppon credible judgments
- it is therefore inconsistent with our CMJ

Question 26

3. Consistency with Background Assumptions about morality

Answer 26

-MR assumes our cultures are morally infallible or incapable of being incorrect about moral truths which means that we cannot criticize any cultures moral norms or our own
- this raises the threat of cultural dogmatism

Question 27

why is cultural dogmatism a negative in this case?

Answer 27

• we cannot make sense of moral progress and regress if what our cultures dictate is always right
• according to moral relativist if norms change we are moving from one good set to another good set
• we cannot say that we are moving from a worse system of norms to a better one

Question 28

4. Usefulness in moral problem solving

Answer 28

-NCR does not tell us more than we need to know
- if ones culture does not take a stance on a moral issue then we have no guidance on how to act
-there are moral conundrums that may involve moral conflict between different cultures which NCR may not be able to help arbitrate