According to the anthropological relativism is a way of understanding the cultural biases based on the behaviours and beliefs of the local inhabitants. This relativism avoids ethnocentrism, i.e., thinking that one’s own culture is the best with respect to others. On the other hand, philosophical relativism is the sceptic notion about the proposition of truth based on the person interpreting it because this kind of relativism does not arrive at any cultural or moral consensus. Normative relativism is an approach mainly adopted by the philosophers whereas anthropologists engage in descriptive relativism. Thus in descriptive relativism, description of the different thought process and the reasoning are made by the anthropologist but they do not provide the evaluation of the same. However, in case of normative relativism the philosophers concentrate more on the evaluation of the claims made through different reasoning or modes of thought. Thus the values of truth are defines through normative relativism on a much broader prospect. Therefore the essay aims to discuss the meaning of relativism and whether they are defensible. To analyse the study four types of relativism has been identified and the easy deals with moral relativism, moral relativism, cultural relativism and cognitive relativism. Each of the relativism has its own theory, believes and practises against the individuals and society as a whole. Moral Relativism Moral relativism is the philosophical theory which states that morality is relative and it holds different moral for different people. Moral relatives are further divided into two forms, ethical subjectivism and cultural relativism. Ethical subjectivism believes that morality is based on individual and cultural relativism is relative to culture. According to the theory of moral relativism it do not makes any sense to ask questions which are abstracts such as whether an act is good or bad. There seems to no badness or goodness in abstract it only exists in specified context. An act may be bad for one set of person whereas the same act may be seen to be right for another set of people. Thus if moral relativism is true one should not act whether the act is good or bad but only judge the act in a particular situation. Some tends to see moral relativism as obvious truth and undeniable whereas other views it as threatening the foundation on which the society is founded (Lukes, 2011, p. 14-23). For some moral relativism, it follows logically from cognitive relativism which tends to relativize the truth in general context. A common but negative reason for embracing moral relativism is the perceived ability of moral objectivism. A more defensible argument against social relativism is that it aims to promote tolerance as it encourages others to understand the different culture (IEP, 2012). There are three kinds of moral relativism, normal moral relativism where different people act as agents and are subject to different ultimate requirements; secondly, Moral Judgment Relativism where moral judgments tend to make implicit reference to speaker or other person, example like subjectivism. And finally it is the Meta Ethical Relativism, where there exist conflicting moral judgments on a particular case. According to Harman, one can hold either of the one while rejecting the other two. Emotivists might accept the
Cite this document
(“Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights Essay”, n.d.)
Retrieved from https://studentshare.net/sociology/11499-what-is-relativisim-is-relativism-defensible
(Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights Essay)
“Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights Essay”, n.d. https://studentshare.net/sociology/11499-what-is-relativisim-is-relativism-defensible.
Cited: 0 times
What is relativisms? Is relativism defensible? Contents Introduction 3 Moral Relativism 4 Ethical Relativism 7 Cultural Relativism 9 Cognitive Relativism 12 Conclusion 14 Reference 15 Introduction The concept of relativism does not bear any absolute validity, as the subjective value of the concept may be different for different people based on their consideration and perception…
According to the study international rights laws and relations provisions are not serving the general interests of justice. There are major gaps in the implementation of the laws, especially in terms of interpretation and application of these rights. There are vague provisions and elements of the international laws which often leave states doubtful in their implementation and interpretation of provisions.
While theories of modernization or development envisioned an ‘evolution’ from undeveloped to developed society, or from traditional to industrial, it is often argued by proponents of universality than non-Western cultures will slowly progress which will raise the status of the universalist principle of human rights (Bruun & Jacobsen, 2000).
Cultural relativism is related to a natural theory of evolution that views the cultural and linguistic diversity of human civilization globally as related to unique aspects of geographical isolation and parallel development.
This thesis shall be evaluated in relation to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights or the UDHR. An evaluation of this thesis shall seek to review the issues in the current applications and implementation of these policies. Body The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was passed by the United Nations General Assembly and it generally declared in its preamble that it shall serve as the “common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society.
The author states that from the Christian philosophical perspective, self interest aspect is viewed as self love or duty to self or saving one’s soul or other aspects but this does not necessarily mean that people should refuse to share with others. Sharing is one way of fulfilling self interest since it can help in saving other people.
In our world with cultures and societies as diverse as they can be, and with histories, ethnicities and traditions poles apart, could we even hope to call anything universal especially something as contentious as human rights On the one hand we have countries like the United States and France which are basically consumption oriented societies, where goods are abundant and economies work on how much each person spends.
States have obligated upon themselves these rules and they serve to limit the autonomy of states to do something toward their whole population: married persons and the unmarried, men as well as women, citizen as well as non-citizen,
This ethical relativism concept argues that the perception of what is ethically right depends on an individual. For instance, an individual might believe in giving a bribe as an act that is morally right while another individual might argue that giving a bribe is ethical
2 pages (500 words)Essay
Got a tricky question? Receive an answer from students like you!Try us!
Let us find you another Essay on topic Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights for FREE!