CULTURAL

RELATIVISM
( Written Report )

Submitted by:
Ramirez, Alliah Aubrey B.
Samot, Sheila Marie Ann C.
Santos, Trisha Mae M.

Submitted to:
Prof. Jeric Gliponeo Laurio
 CULTURAL RELATIVISM

HISTORY/ORIGIN
Cultural relativism has become a pop-culture reference in humanities and social sciences. It
is one of the concepts that have found credence outside of academia, especially in the land of
identity politics. The origins of the term are unclear, but its most popular reference was first
made by an anthropologist, Franz Boas. Franz Boas is an influential anthropologist in North
America, he also inspired a generation of students to fight against racial science and promote the
idea of cultural relativism, though they didn’t use that exact term. His students were the first
generation of scholars to teach this concept across academic institutions in US, UK, and Canada.

DEFINITION
CULTURAL RELATIVISM: There is no ultimate standard of good or evil
 Any opinion on morality or ethics is subject to the cultural perspective of each person.
 No moral or ethical system can be considered the “best” or “worst”, and no particular
moral or ethical position can actually be considered “right” or “wrong”.

CULTURAL RELATIVISM: The idea of universal truth in ethics is a myth

 The customs of different societies are all that exist. To say that a custom is correct or
incorrect would imply that we can judge that custom by some independent standard of
right and wrong, but no such standard exist.
 Rather than simply saying that “we need to understand the morals of other cultures”, it
says “we cannot judge the morals of other cultures,” regardless of the reasons for their
actions.

KINDS
1. Descriptive Cultural Relativism
 The view that people’s beliefs differ from culture to culture.
 A theory in anthropology, not ethics. It is not a theory in ethics because it is
not an evaluative or normative view. It does not say, nor imply anything about
how anyone ought to behave.
2. Normative Cultural Relativism
 The view that it is not one’s beliefs but moral facts themselves that differ from
culture to culture.
 This makes an ought or value judgment in ethics.
ADVANTAGES OF CULTURAL RELATIVISM

1. It is a system which promotes cooperation.

For the most part, humanity is strong because of the differences we all have. Every
individual has different perspective that is based on their upbringing, experiences, and personal
thoughts. By embracing the many differences we have, the cooperation creates the potential for a
stronger society. Each individual definition of success allows us to pursue stronger bonds with
one another and potentially achieve more because there are no limitations from a group level on
what can or cannot be accomplished.

2. It creates a society where equality is possible.

In any society, people rise by climbing on top of other people. It is a socially acceptable
way of creating discrimination. We see this today in the wage gap that women face, the
educational opportunities that minority groups face, and the violence we see because of political
oppression. Cultural relativism allows the individual to define their moral code without defining
the moral codes of others. Each person is separate in such a society. That separation creates
equality because each person can set their own definition of success.

3. People can pursue a genuine interest.

In the modern society, people are funneled toward a certain career options because of
their circumstances. If you can’t afford to go to college, then you pursue a vocational career or
some sort of entrepreneurship instead of a career that requires a graduate degree. If you can’t
afford to buy a house, you go rent an apartment. In a cultural relativism, you get to pursue your
own interest without restriction. You set the definitions of what you can have and what you
cannot have. When implemented successfully, each person would get to focus on their strengths
instead of their weaknesses.

4. Respect is encouraged in a system of cultural relativism.

People come from different cultures. They have different ideas. They pursue different
definitions of success. Because such a system promotes the individual’s definition instead of a
group definition, a society can evolve because there is a natural level of respect built into the
progress. Each person is naturally given the right to pursue life through their own specific
perspective and then learn from their experiences in a way that works best for them.
5. It preserves human cultures.
Humanity is a very diverse set of thoughts, traditions, ideas and practices. Many times,
the traditions of humanity are set aside so that a group set of of standards can appeased. Native
and First Nations tribes in North America did this by signing treaties which would help them to
preserve some lands, but limit their rights by being subject to a new government authority. They
were forced to trade some of their culture. Under the theory of cultural relativism, such a trade
would not be necessary. It wouldn’t even be a consideration.

6. Cultural relativism creates a society without a judgement.

We are so trained to judge others in today’s world that we don’t even give it a second
thought. Looking at someone and saying, “Glad that isn’t me” is a judgement. Under the theory
of cultural relativism, judgement goes away. The only person that judges you is yourself. People
who might disagree with you are able to set their own codes and standards for their own
individualistic bubble. Instead of worrying about others, you only worry about yourself.

7. We can create personal moral codes based on societal standards with ease.
To determine if a decision would be “right” or “wrong”, cultural relativism allows
individuals to consult with the standards of their society or culture. It is a simple test to
determine the course that a person should take in a such a circumstance. By consulting with the
moral code of culture, one question must be asked: does the action conform to the cultural moral
code? If it does, then the action is permitted. Although this process can allow for distrurbing
results, most cultures are based on inclusion instead of exclusion. It is only in structures where
apartheid, segregation, or purging where disturbing outcomes are typically present.

8. It stops cultural conditioning.

People tend to adapt their attitudes, thoughts, and beliefs to the people they are with on a
regular basis. This is cultural conditioning and it prevents people from having an individualistic
perspective. Cultural relativism stops this.

DISADVANTAGES OF CULTURAL RELATIVISM

1. It creates a system that is fueled by personal

Every society has a certain natural bias to it because of humanity operates. People tend to
prefer to be with others who have similar thoughts and feelings, so they segregate themselves
into neighborhoods, communities, and social groups that share specific perspectives. When
people are given the power to define their own moral code, then they will do so based on their
own personal bias. There is no longer a group perspective. People follow their own code at the
expense of others.

2. It would create chaos.

People who can follow their own moral code because there is no “wrong” or “right”
would be allowed to pursue any life they preferred under the theory of cultural relativism. If
you’re upset with your neighbor, then you can kill that person without consequence if your moral
code allows for murder. Instead of purchasing something, you could steal it if you see stealing it
if you see stealing as “right” to do. There is no real way to protect people in such a society, so
each person becomes responsible to protect themselves. It creates a system that is Darwinian in
practically, where only the strongest can survive.

3. It is an idea that is based on the perfection of humanity.

Many people strive to do good every day. Most want to see everyone have the chance to
pursue happiness in some way. That is why the idea of cultural relativism often seems to be
inviting. The only problem is that people are not perfect. We can be forgetful. We can lie. We
can become aggressive when a driver cuts you off while driving and puts your family at risk.
Without a group moral code in place to govern decisions, anything could happen when we
experience these moments of imperfection.

4. It could promote a lack of diversity.

Cultural relativism promotes an individualistic point of view, so although it seems to
promote diversity, it actually removes it from a society. It would allow men to exclude women
from voting once again. It would stop employers from paying someone a fair wage – or even
paying them a wage at all. The only standards that are in place are those which are set by
individual involved, which means everyone is pursuing their own position of strength. We
cannot create diversity when the emphasis of a society is individualistic gain that can come at the
expense of others.

5. It draws people away from one another.

Although cultural relativism can promote people coming together to share their strengths,
it can also encourage people to draw apart from one another. C.S Lewis, in his description of
Hell from The Screwtape Letters, envisions a place where people are constantly going away
from each other to avoid the demons that each person has. Because each person is uncertain of
what codes and standards another is following, the natural inclination for self-preservation
causes people to draw away. You might develop a close-knit community at first, but as Lewis
describes, each demon causes people to back away from one another instead of coming closer.
6. It could limit moral progress.
When we look at the idea of moral progress, we think of becoming more inclusionary
instead of exclusionary. This inclusion is reflected in the laws and customs of the culture. The
current debate on the transgender bathroom laws in North Carolina is a good example of this. In
cultural relativism, everyone would be able to use their bathroom of choice OR a culture could
state that everyone must use a specific bathroom without exception and there would be complete
agreement in either choice. Within the society, either choice would be seen as moral progress but
in reality, it could hold back people.

7. It could limit humanity’s progress

We often think of the concept of cultural relativism as progression, but it isn’t necessarily
that way. When you remove the ability to judge one standard from another, then the comparative
process of placing a current society or culture against a past one is removed as well. No
definition of success can be implemented because each is successful in its own way. We might
consider the ability for women to vote as the “right” thing to do today, but in the past societies,
not allowing women to vote was also “right” from a cultural standpoint. Because both are “right”
there’s no way to judge progress.

MORAL ABSOLUTISM

HISTORY/ORIGIN

Moral absolutism was popular amongst ancient Greek philosophers such as Plato and
Aristotle. It also largely shaped historical societies through the "divine right of kings". The
divine right of kings gave royalty political and religious right to rule as they were under the
mandate of God. It also made the setting up and upholding of laws easier as rulers were subject
only to the will of God, and not to the people over which they served. This has carried over into
the creation of laws and justice systems across the world, where the law must be upheld with no
exceptions. This is seen in some Muslim countries, where Islamic revivalists are attempting to
bring back Hudud punishments, which are thought to have been mandated by God.

DEFINITION
 Moral Absolutism is the ethical belief that there are absolute standards against which
moral questions can be judged, and that certain actions are right or wrong, regardless of
the context of the act.
 It argues that there are universal moral truths relevant across all context and all people.
These truths can be grounded in sources like law, rationality, human nature, or religion
CULTURAL RELATIVISM VS MORAL ABSOLUTISM

 There is no
ultimate  There are
standard of absolute
good or evil standards
/there is no against which
universal  Under
moral questions
truth. Moral
can be judged
Realism
 Certain actions
 “we cannot (there are
are right or
judge the moral
wrong,
morals of facts)
regardless of
other cultures,” the context of
regardless of nd
the act.
the reasons for
their actions.