A discussion of the debate between cultural relativism and ethical objectivism.
This paper examines the argument whether ethical objectivism or ethical relativism is the better view in relation to judging human beliefs and behavior. It puts forward the views of the eminent anthropologist Ruth Benedict who believes that human beliefs essay writer tool and actions vary because different cultures are exposed to numerous environments and have various histories and how a type of ethical relativism known as conventionalism, asserts moral decisions dependent upon the society one lives in. It also presents the argument for ethical objectivism as proclaimed by the philosopher Louis Pojman. In conclusion, the writer chooses which side of the debate he agrees with and describes why.
“The eminent anthropologist Ruth Benedict believes human beliefs and actions vary because different cultures are exposed to numerous environments and have various histories. She endorses a type of ethical relativism known as conventionalism, which asserts moral decisions are dependent upon the society one lives in. In other words most people living in society are like plastic in that they can be shaped according to the fashion of a particular culture. In short, normality is culturally defined. The best examples to illustrate how normality is social constructed are cultures where an abnormality of our culture is the cornerstone of another society’s culture.”