Explain the difference between moral relativism and cultural relativism
Owen Taylor R.P.E. Essay 20th September 2008 a) Explain the difference between moral relativism and cultural relativism Relativism is the principle that all points of view are equally valid and that all truth is relative to the individual. Moral and cultural relativism are perceived by many as somewhat similar and are easily confused. However there is a substantial difference between the two, which will be explored in the following. Cultural relativism is the manner that a person's attitude and conduct should be understood in terms of his or her culture. It explains the reasons why those from different cultures have a vastly different way of life. Cultural diversity has been documented since the earliest times. The Greek historian Herodotus travelled around the world and found it vastly different from his native homeland "The customs of the Getae...when a baby is born the family sits around and mourns at the though of suffering it must in endure...but when somebody dies, they bury him with merriment and rejoicing" this exemplifies the gulf between beliefs throughout the world then. Now, there are still limitless different beliefs in the world. One of these is the death penalty. It is enforced in numerous countries such as the United States and Thailand yet in even more countries it is highly frowned upon showing the cultural
As we know, philosophers divide ethical theories into three major
As we know, philosophers divide ethical theories into three major classes. They are Metaethics(descriptive), Conceptual(applied), and Normative(prescriptive). Metaethics basically takes the scientific approach to concocting where exactly our ethical principals and philosophies come from (Feiser, 2005). Descriptions and explanations of moral behaviors and beliefs are provided on the basis of facts studied by such specialists of anthropology, sociology and history (Beauchamp & Bowie, 2005). Conceptual ethics covers huge controversial issues on the basis of what is right, good, and established by justice, virtues, responsibilities and obligations. These credited terms are examples submitted by Beauchamp and Bowie on page 6 of our text. James Feiser explains that issues such as abortion, animal rights, capital punishment, nuclear war, etc. would fall under conceptual ethics. Normative ethics distinguishes the differences between what is right and wrong (Feiser, 2005); what mom and dad taught us growing up. It is defined by what is accepted as the societal "norm" (Beauchamp & Bowie, 2005). Is killing someone ok? No. Is saving a life ok? Yes. Is defending your life ok? Yes. If either the attacker or defendant dies in an act of self-defense for one's life, who's to blame? In our society, what is established as the norm is if the attacker dies, the defendant is not held
The Virtues in the company: Prudence: Indispensable or only acomplement for the good enterprise handling?
The Virtues in the company: Prudence: Indispensable or only a complement for the good enterprise handling? Which are the tools on which there are to count an outstanding industralist? It will be sufficient to count only on a complete theoretical frame, or will be required an integral education that also includes the education of own moral values of each person? Often we questioned ourselves about which there is to have an industralist successful leader and, who is able to take their organization to the top. There are some who maintain that a prestigious formal education is all the necessary one to develop the potentialities of the person, and to form to whom it will have under his responsibility, the future of the companies. to happen this, industralists outstanding and more successful would not exist than others; if all counted on the same education, and this by itself is sufficient, there would not be companies that emphasized by on the others. It seemed to be, that in no case it is sufficient simply to count on education and theoretical models, although yes are necessary. To be industralist successful (in all the scopes which it means), it is necessary to have in addition, a complete formation personal, composed by Christian and universal values, that differentiates to a man average, to one truely successful one. Here the virtues that each man has
Arguments For Property Dualism
Arguments for Property Dualism Property dualism proclaims the existence of a single, physical substance (unlike Cartesian dualism), but argues that this single substance has two potential properties: physical and mental states that are not reducible. It is not just that we might talk of mental and physical states in different ways, but that the difference is in ontology as well as language. This is equivalent to historical notions that living things contained some 'vital force'. Essentially mental states are an extra property of matter in the brain. Property dualists argue that consciousness is caused by the physical processes of the brain and that mental properties are caused by physical properties, but have no effect themselves on the physical properties, making the relationship one way. Fundamentally, property dualism is an advancement of substance dualism, and over this theory it has several advantages. Firstly, by having only a single substance it avoids to the problems of interaction and location associated with the non-spatial Cartesian mental substance. Secondly, it is not rooted in religious beliefs and is thus more scientifically based than Descartes' theory. Thirdly property dualism is compatible with Descartes' arguments that the mind has properties that are distinct from the body, thus taking the benefits whilst leaving the drawbacks. Finally, property dualism
Explain Wittgenstein(TM)s attack on the notion of a logically private language
Explain Wittgenstein's attack on the notion of a logically private language Wittgenstein outlines two problems for the existence of other minds and the impossibility of a logically private language. Wittgenstein's major attack is on the Cartesian idea that meanings of words and mental states have the capability of being logically private. If he succeeded in doing so, he completely irradiates any presupposition raised by Cartesians. Descartes believed in solipsism, namely one can never be sure of the existence of others. One merely forms a conception of one's own mental state. The Cartesian further argues for the view that I and my mental state exist, and exist only (''I think, therefore I am''); the person is merely using their own logically private language to formulate such sceptical doubt. Yet Wittgenstein attacks this. He states that it is illogical to claim that one can talk about the mind, solely from a private first person perspective. Thus, the person is unable to acquire and use general terms and concepts that are used to classify and describe the mind. In other words, one cannot talk about one's own mind. This creates the assumption that a person can speak a language only they can understand, in the logical private state of their own mind. He goes on to say that, first person ascriptions are only able to take place because; a private language has been
Hick's views on body and soul
. 'Hick's views on the body/soul distinction are more coherent than those of Dawkins.' Discuss As materialists both Hicks and Dawkins are united in the belief that human beings are whole, they oppose the dualist belief that the body and soul are two separate entities, with the soul being able to exist beyond the death of the physical body. Despite their apparent similarities Hick and Dawkins present opposing view points. Hick a 'soft' materialist presents the possibility of an afterlife. Dawkin's view certainly appear more simplistic: as a 'hard' materialist he presents the view that the only possible way for human beings to exist beyond death is through the continuation of our genes through our offspring. According to Dawkin life is nothing more than bytes of information continued in DNA. For Dawkins, the only conceivable theory is that of evolution. We are as we are because of our genetic make up, not the efforts of our souls. Hick's view is that a person includes both physical and mental, the human being is therefore a 'psycho physical unity'. According to Hicks what lives after death is a replica or a duplicate. It is God who creates the replica, once we die. Hick's views are in keeping with the Christian doctrine of resurrection as outlined by St Paul in 1 Corinthians: 'When buried, it is ugly and weak: when raised, it will be beautiful and strong. .....There
Explain what is meant by calling an ethical theory relativist or absolutist.
Explain what is meant by calling an ethical theory relativist or absolutist. Absolutism is based on a universal set of ethical morals that all people are subject to follow. These principles are objective and therefore more like legalistic morals because no personal judgement is included, and are intrinsically, in and of itself, right. Consequently, every person of every time and every place should follow these laws, regardless of belief. This supports the idea that moral standards have always existed so that good may prevail in the universe. An example of an absolutist is Plato who believed that justice and goodness existed as ideas beyond our awareness in another world, meaning that goodness and justice exists but what we comprehend are merely illusions of the certain truth. Our actions, consequently, can participate in real goodness, meaning that we must be good or bad in an absolute sense. Plato used this idea of universal principles to support his Theory of Ideas which bases itself that justice, goodness, love, etc. are shadows of the certain truth found in the World of the Forms. This strengthens the theory of Religious absolutism, that everyone is based on the same universal standards, for example both an American and an Indian would both be equally wrong for killing for whatever reason. The deontological view is that there are moral rules that cannot be broken and
Explain how Aquinass theory of Natural Law can be used to decide on the right course of action. (25 Marks)
Explain how Aquinas's theory of Natural Law can be used to decide on the right course of action. (25 Marks) Natural Moral Law includes those ethical theories which state that there is a natural order to our world that should be followed. This natural order is determined by some supernatural power. Natural Law originated in the philosophy of Aristotle (384 - 322 BC) and was developed by Thomas Aquinas (1225 - 1274). It is an absolute theory of ethics that is rooted in our human nature and our search for genuine happiness and fulfilment. Aquinas used the ideas of Aristotle and the Stoics as an underpinning for Natural Law that: * Human beings have an essential rational nature given by God in order for us to live and flourish. * Even without knowledge of God, reason can discover the laws that lead to human flourishing. * The Natural Laws are universal and unchangeable and should be used to judge the laws of particular societies. Like Aristotle, Aquinas concludes that humans aim for some goal or purpose, but does not see this as eudemonia which Aristotle saw as the final goal for humans (supreme happiness/good). Humans for Aquinas are above all made "in the image of god" and so the supreme good must be the development of this image i.e. perfection. However unlike Aristotle, Aquinas did not think that this perfection was possible in this life. For Aquinas, Natural Law i.e.
Analyse and evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of natural moral law as a definitive ethical theory
Analyse and evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of natural moral law as a definitive ethical theory (12) The strengths that can be ascribed to natural law are a product of its absolutist deontological view of morality. This is to say that it enables people to establish common rules in order to structure communities. This can be an attractive option in a society such as our, enduring a relativist era that is suffering from a break down in traditional social structures and moral uncertainty. Aquinas's view of reason as a tool for moral understanding and his idea of a common nature and morality for all people gives natural law a universality that goes beyond any one religion or culture. This can be seen as a very positive aspect considering the intercultural strife and disharmony that exists between cultures and societies which all uphold similar basic principles such as conserving life. Natural moral law gives a concrete reason to be moral and provides a firm basis for individuals to refuse to cross moral boundaries. It also provides justification and support for those ideas popular in today's world such as human rights, whilst condemning actions such as torture, irrespective of consequences. Natural law also provides a way of living, giving guidance on day-today questions of how to live life and then links them to the fundamental principles of life. It provides a complete
Compare and Contrast the Philisophical Contributions of Nietzsche and Mill to our understanding of political and social tyranny.
Compare and contrast the philosophical contributions Nietzsche and Mill make to our understanding of political and social tyranny. Both philosophers, Nietzsche and Mill make contrasting and similar contributions to our understanding of the two terms. I intend explore how each philosopher does this and the differences and similarities between their two philosophies. Before comparing and contrasting the contributions of both Nietzsche and Mill to our understanding of political and social tyranny, it is important to define exactly what these terms mean, and to distinguish between the two. Political tyranny on the one hand is the imposition of positive liberty by a tyrant to an individual or a collective group of individuals. That is, a situation where a certain way of life is dictated to citizens through the presence of obstacles, barriers or constraints. If we lived in a politically tyrannical society, we would be living under the control of a dictator, ruled by a single governing body. Furthermore, the pressure for an individual to conform to these "rules" can be seen as a result of ones fear of public disapproval - a recognised form of social tyranny. Philosopher John Stewart Mill, rigorously educated by his philosopher father James Mill, began making contributions to politics and philosophy from the early 1830s, when he wrote profusely on such political and philosophical
