Phil120W- Moral and legal problems Simon Frasier University

D103- Jacob Shwartz July 6th, 2022

An analysis of James Rachel’s “The Challenge of Cultural Relativism”

Joe Tony Kattoor - 301477376

Cultural Relativism is the most common form of ethical relativism. The latter is the thesis

that ethical truths depend on other’s beliefs and feeling, in other words they are relative to

individual or cultural commitments. In this paper, I will analyze the consequences of cultural

relativism proposed by Rachels and support the validity of these consequences.

In, ‘The challenge of Cultural Relativism’ by James Rachels, cultural relativism is

explained as the view that acts are morally right or wrong depends upon the norms of the society

in which they are performed. An example of this used by James Rachels is that the Greeks

believed it was wrong to eat the dead whereas the Callatians believed the opposite. Therefore,

the matter of eating the dead is neither objectively right or objectively wrong, it is a matter of

opinion that varies from diverse cultures. Another example provided is that of infanticide, the

Eskimos believe infanticide to be morally permissible whereas the Americans do not. Therefore,

infanticide is not objectively right or objectively wrong. These arguments can be generalized to

say that different cultures have different moral codes, therefore there is no objective truth in

morality, right or wrong are matters of opinion that vary between cultures (Cultural differences

argument). James Rachels claims this argument to be unsound, stating that the conclusion does

not follow from the premise. He gives the example of flat-earthers, some societies believe the

earth is flat whereas, others believe it to be spherical. This does not mean that there is no

objective truth, he states that there is no reason to think that if the world is round everyone must

know it, if there are moral truths not everyone may know it.
Phil120W- Moral and legal problems Simon Frasier University
D103- Jacob Shwartz July 6th, 2022

Despite the ‘Cultural differences argument’ being invalid, James Rachels states that

cultural relativism might still be true and provides the three consequences of cultural relativism.

The first consequence is we could no longer say that the customs of other societies are inferior to

our own. This includes cultures that practices cannibalism or an antisemitic culture. The second

consequence is that we could decide whether actions are right or wrong just by consulting the

standards of our society. One can’t criticize their own society’s code, Indians cannot criticize the

caste system as it is in its culture and therefore morally right. The third consequence would be

that moral progress is called into doubt. If changes are made in a culture, we are not able to

determine if it is indeed progress, for example the abolition of slavery, in accordance with

cultural relativism we cannot determine whether this is progress.

One might dispute the consequences of cultural relativism by stating that any social

reform that occurs changes the culture of a society. These changes may vary from the previous

cultural norms and as such would be considered a new culture accepted by the same society. This

would be considered moral progress for the society as the change in culture benefits the people in

the society. For example, the abolition of slavery for Americans, creates a new culture for the

same American society.

To address this dispute and to support the validity of the consequences, we cannot say

that a change in culture is moral progress for the society as there is no standard to judge what is

or isn’t moral progress, we cannot say that society morally progresses if the change in culture

benefits the people. For example, slavery benefited some people but was not beneficial to others,

similarly its abolition benefited some but were detrimental to others. This shows the validity of

the consequences caused by cultural relativism.

Phil120W- Moral and legal problems Simon Frasier University
D103- Jacob Shwartz July 6th, 2022

I agree with James Rachels, his work analyzes cultural relativism and makes valid

arguments against it. He argues against the claim that there is no universal code by which we can

judge moral codes. This can be seen in the example he provides of how many cultures do not

fundamentally differ from each other. Eskimos and all other cultures do in fact care for their

young as without this the society would not have survived because their older members would

not be replaced. However, he does not provide an alternative way of understanding universal

codes, or how to judge different cultures. Despite this shortcoming, his essay is effective as it

does acknowledge that cultural relativism teaches us two important lessons. The first being that

all of our preferences are not based on an absolute rational standard. The second is to always

keep an open mind because the way we are raised to view something as right or wrong may be

challenged by someone who was raised in a different way.

Word Count: 758

Sources:

Rachels, James. “The Challenge of Cultural Relativism.” Exploring Ethics. Ed. Steven Kahn.

Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014.