Withing the realm of moral relativism, there are two views. Subjective relativism, meaning right actions are actions that are right because they are endorsed by an individual person; and Cultural relativism. “Cultural Relativism is the view that right actions are those endorsed by one’s culture.” (Vaughn 149) In this essay we will focus on the latter. To be more specific, we will focus on how cultural relativism has some inadequacies; infallibility, the unlikelihood of disagreement, and the impossibility of moral progress.
Cultural relativism means that right actions are whatever a culture deems right. Cultural relativism implies moral infallibility. According to the dictionary, infallibility means “Incapable of error: unerring” (“Infallible”) If culture “a” approves an action like murder, to be right; it is therefore right. If a different culture “b” approves an action that is opposite of culture “a”; it too is therefore right. Each Culture is infallible when it comes to deciding whether an action is morally right. An Example of this would be Germany in World War II. If the Majority of people In Germany deemed it right to exterminate Jews, cultural relativism implies they are morally right and infallible.
If the Majority of people in the United States deemed it right to not exterminate Jews, they would be morally right and infallible too. This also would imply that there is no absolute moral standard to judge upon.
Another inadequacy of cultural relativism is the unlikelihood of disagreement among people. Normally, People would have disagreements about morality. If two friends have different viewpoints on a moral issue, it is more about approving or disapproving then it is a disagreement. In the same way, we would not be able to criticize cultures. Under cultural relativism, there is no objective moral code to appeal to. Which means each individual culture is correct. Since various contradictory moral standards of different cultures is correct, there is no disagreements, only approvals or disapprovals.
The final inadequacy being discussed is the impossibility of moral progress. We generally like to look back through history and judge societies of today as having progressed or not progressed on moral issues. Under cultural relativism, this is not possible. As stated, several times previously, there is no objective moral code to appeal to. Since there is no objective moral code in which we can measure progress, there is no moral progress. This would mean there is only a change of moral attitudes throughout history with each moral attitude being equal.
Many people find it appealing or adhere to cultural relativism the way they do subjective relativism. They find it appealing because it releases them from critical reasoning and thinking about morality. Although it may seem appealing and easier to adhere to cultural relativism, these inadequacies mentioned above bring some serious doubts to these moral theories.
Works Cited
Vaughn, Lewis. “3.2 Moral Relativism.” Philosophy here and now: powerful ideas in everyday life. third. New York: Oxford University Press, 2018. 149. Print.
“Infallible.” Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary, Merriam-Webster, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/infallible. Accessed 3 Oct. 2020.
Works Consulted
Vaughn, Lewis. “3.2 Moral Relativism.” Philosophy here and now: powerful ideas in everyday life. third. New York: Oxford University Press, 2018. 149-152. Print.
Seeking Truth and Knowledge 