In his article Cultural relativism and pagan values, Melville Herkovits defines the principle of cultural relativism as judgments be based on experience, and experience is see by each individual in terms of his protest enculturation (26). This is the basic premise of cultural relativism, that beliefs, values, and goods argon all based on ones culture. Therefore, since morality is based on society and different societies have different views of right and wrong, thither faeces be no moral absolutes. Since at that place are no absolutes, under this view of cultural relativism all moral views determined by ones culture are deemed true whether they negate or not.
Upon first glance, relativism seems like a very beguile concept of morality in the piece. It is clear to see that there are differences of what is acceptable and unacceptable in different societies crossways the world. Growing up in Western culture I have grown a fondness for meat, especially steak. It is a momentous occasion when I can go by or fix a nice, juicy steak for a meal, the larger the better. This is not a problem in my culture, save those fewer health conscience people who say I impart die by heart disease.
However, if I were raised in an eastern, Hindu, culture these dietary practices would be considered wrong.
My act of eating overawe would be considered a moral atrocity. From examples like these and many others nigh the world we can see a good slip of paper for different cultures having different moral views, but is that really the trip? I believe that at a surface take cultural relativism holds some merit, however if we look deeper into the issue we can find a flawed, and inaccurate theory for the way that the world should work.
Some of the biggest arguments given in defense...
If you want to get a wide essay, order it on our website: Ordercustompaper.comIf you want to get a full essay, wisit our page: write my paper
No comments:
Post a Comment