Ethical Relativism

7 Pages 1738 Words

Ethical relativism is a theory in which the point of ethics and their universality is brought out. Implying that for every different culture there will be a different code of ethics, for any given time. Within this paper I discuss the certain implications that go along with ethical relativism. Which are tolerance towards other cultures and there views. Also that there is no moral argument possible. And that ethics becomes conformity in which ones conforms to any given culture. Also I discuss briefly the views of the Ruth Benedict and Solomon Asch, which both have written about ethical relativism.




Ethical relativism is when no ethical principles are universally valid at the same time. All moral principles are valid relative to cultural tastes. The rules of the society serve as a standard. Simply stated, it means that there are no intrinsically right or wrong actions. According to that particular social community. What is universally socially acceptable is widely variable. Therefore we as a society may not impose a universal set of laws when it concerns ethics. If moral standards go no deeper than social customs, no one way of doing things is any better or worse than the next.
Ethical relativism gives way for three implications concerning ethics. The first is ethical relativism preaches tolerance towards different cultures and their ethics. Giving cultural freedom in which no one culture can forcible institute their laws of ethics on another culture. Ethical relativism also develops the argument that no moral argument is possible. And it also says that to become ethical means, one will have to conform to a culture given ethics.

CULTURAL RELATIVISM:
Ethical judgments and moral rules always reflect the cultural context from which they are derived and cannot be immediately applied to other cultural contexts. Having tolerance for others’ ethics is closely related to cultural relativism...