PHILOS 2YY3 Dempsey January 13, 2014 Lecture 3 ...
PHILOS 2YY3 Dempsey January 13, 2014 Lecture 3 Discussion Question Jan. 13 1) in Canada which isn’t immoral but just different One which you would be inclined to say “live and let live.” 2) Think of a cultural practice different from cultural practices in Canada which you believe is objectively immoral • One which you would NOT be inclined to say “live and let live.” • • • •
Cultural Differences • Different cultures DO have different codes of behaviour. Examples from the book: • Greek versus Indian funeral rites • Eating the dead – in some cultures it’s a sign of respect, in others it’s unthinkable • Polygamy -vs- monogamy • In extreme environments, some cultures practice infanticide – as a sort of birth control Cultural Relativism • Is morality relative to a culture? Is morality just a “socially approved habit”? • Or are there objective standards of right and wrong • According to which some cultural practices can be deemed immoral? Cultural Relativism • Ruth Benedict (early 20th century anthropologist): • “Morality differs in every society, and is a convenient term for socially approved habits.” Cultural Relativism • Universal truths in ethics are a myth • Our moral code is only one of many – no better and no worse • William Sumner: p. 16 Five Elements of Cultural Relativism 1) Different societies have different moral codes 2) The moral code of a society determines what is right in that society 3) There are no objective standards with which to judge one society’s moral code 4) The moral code of our society has no special status 5) It is arrogant for us to judge the conduct of other peoples (we must be tolerant) • • • •
Notice that (2) and (5) are potentially inconsistent: 2) The moral code of a society determines what is right in that society 5) It is arrogant for us to judge the conduct of other peoples (we must be tolerant) Part of the Nazi moral code was to be intolerant of most other cultures
Cultural Differences Argument • Cultural relativists argue from facts about different cultures
To the status of morality. E.g., pp. 17-18 BUT this conclusion does not follow The premise is about what people believe, the conclusion, about what is really the case • Rachels: differences in moral codes do not mean that some are not better than others • • •
Counter-example: • In some societies, people believe that the earth is flat, in others, that it is spherical • Does it therefore follow that there is no right answer??! • Rachels: the “cultural differences argument” is therefore flawed Consequences of Cultural Relativism 1) We could no longer say that another culture’s moral practices are either superior or inferior • We could not criticize e.g., one group of humans enslaving another • We could not criticize e.g., a country for violently suppressing political dissent. P. 19 2) We can no longer criticize the moral codes of our own society • To determine what is right, we simply check the standards of our society • BUT it is hard to believe that a society’s standards are necessarily perfect • Just because a society permits the enslavement of a race, doesn’t make it right • Criticizing your own society would always be immoral because it goes against that society’s present standards 3) The idea of moral progress does not make sense • Progress means replacing old social standards with new, hopefully better, ones • BUT if relativism is true, progress is (always) wrong b/c it conflicts with present standards. P. 20 • For these reasons most ethicists reject cultural relativism • •
Less Disagreement Than It Seems? Perhaps there are fewer moral differences between cultures than there seems to
be Differences in values often explained by differences in systems of belief (religious and metaphysical) • Differences in funeral practices may reflect different views about the afterlife. • But in all cases, the funeral rites reflect respect for the dead. Cragg & Koggel p. 605 • Differences in customs and context may obscure underlying moral agreement •
• • • •
Rachels: differences in practices often explained by the severity of environment Infanticide in extreme environments may be necessary to preserve the group Lack of birth control PLUS severe scarcity of resources In this case, infanticide may reflect concern for the survival of other children
• • • • • •
Universal, Common Values Prohibition against murder How could a society function without such a prohibition? Telling the truth Communication presumes that people tell the truth – at least most of the time R: moral rules necessary for a society’s survival are UNIVERSAL
Case Study • A case study: female genital mutilation: “female circumcision,” “excision” • Much, if not all, of the female genitals are castrated – painful, disfiguring, often unsanitary • Fauziya escaped to America, but spent 18 months in jail while authorities decided what to do. P. 24 • Is this practice objectively wrong? Or should we “live and let live”? Case Study Notice: • Unlike some unusual practices (e.g., infanticide in extreme environments) • There is seemingly no social benefit • Consider the “reasons” given in defense: p. 25 Why are we reluctant to judge? 1) Nervousness about interfering in cultural traditions of others • Europeans have poor record with treatment of native cultures • BUT there is a difference between judging morality of a practice and imposing your culture on a group Why are we reluctant to judge? 2) Many wish to be tolerant and not racist • BUT tolerance does not require believing that all practices are morally equal 3) People are reluctant to show contempt for other cultures • BUT condemning a practice is not the same as condemning entire culture Five elements again 1) Different societies have different moral codes • This is true, but many values are universal, and differences sometimes disguise deeper similarities 2) The moral code of a society determines what is right in that society • We must distinguish what people believe from what is really true • Societies can be wrong about a moral issue. Examples: P. 27 3) There is no objective standard with which to judge a society’s moral code • This is false – there are objective standards (e.g., harm and benefit, the welfare of those affected) 4) The moral code of our society has no special status • This is true: some of our social practices may be immoral 5) It is arrogant for us to judge the conduct of other peoples – we must be tolerant • While tolerance is generally good, we should NOT be tolerant of everything! (E.g., slavery)
Notice also: (5) is self-contradictory – it judges those who judge others! If it is wrong to judge others, then it is wrong to judge those who judge others! Absolute toleration means that you cannot even judge those who are intolerant! C and K p. 607 • • •
• 2 lessons from cultural relativism 1) Reminds us that some of our own practices are may not be universal or morally correct • Some of what we assume are moral truths are really just our own social conventions • E.g., Janet Jackson’s “wardrobe malfunction.” P. 29 2) Provides an antidote to dogmatic prejudice • Realizing many of our values are just conventions we grew up with makes us more open-minded
Cultural Differences • Different cultures DO have different codes of behaviour. Examples from the book: • Greek versus Indian funeral rites • Eating the dead – in some cultures it’s a sign of respect, in others it’s unthinkable • Polygamy -vs- monogamy • In extreme environments, some cultures practice infanticide – as a sort of birth control Cultural Relativism • Is morality relative to a culture? Is morality just a “socially approved habit”? • Or are there objective standards of right and wrong • According to which some cultural practices can be deemed immoral? Cultural Relativism • Ruth Benedict (early 20th century anthropologist): • “Morality differs in every society, and is a convenient term for socially approved habits.” Cultural Relativism • Universal truths in ethics are a myth • Our moral code is only one of many – no better and no worse • William Sumner: p. 16 Five Elements of Cultural Relativism 1) Different societies have different moral codes 2) The moral code of a society determines what is right in that society 3) There are no objective standards with which to judge one society’s moral code 4) The moral code of our society has no special status 5) It is arrogant for us to judge the conduct of other peoples (we must be tolerant) • • • •
Notice that (2) and (5) are potentially inconsistent: 2) The moral code of a society determines what is right in that society 5) It is arrogant for us to judge the conduct of other peoples (we must be tolerant) Part of the Nazi moral code was to be intolerant of most other cultures
Cultural Differences Argument • Cultural relativists argue from facts about different cultures
To the status of morality. E.g., pp. 17-18 BUT this conclusion does not follow The premise is about what people believe, the conclusion, about what is really the case • Rachels: differences in moral codes do not mean that some are not better than others • • •
Counter-example: • In some societies, people believe that the earth is flat, in others, that it is spherical • Does it therefore follow that there is no right answer??! • Rachels: the “cultural differences argument” is therefore flawed Consequences of Cultural Relativism 1) We could no longer say that another culture’s moral practices are either superior or inferior • We could not criticize e.g., one group of humans enslaving another • We could not criticize e.g., a country for violently suppressing political dissent. P. 19 2) We can no longer criticize the moral codes of our own society • To determine what is right, we simply check the standards of our society • BUT it is hard to believe that a society’s standards are necessarily perfect • Just because a society permits the enslavement of a race, doesn’t make it right • Criticizing your own society would always be immoral because it goes against that society’s present standards 3) The idea of moral progress does not make sense • Progress means replacing old social standards with new, hopefully better, ones • BUT if relativism is true, progress is (always) wrong b/c it conflicts with present standards. P. 20 • For these reasons most ethicists reject cultural relativism • •
Less Disagreement Than It Seems? Perhaps there are fewer moral differences between cultures than there seems to
be Differences in values often explained by differences in systems of belief (religious and metaphysical) • Differences in funeral practices may reflect different views about the afterlife. • But in all cases, the funeral rites reflect respect for the dead. Cragg & Koggel p. 605 • Differences in customs and context may obscure underlying moral agreement •
• • • •
Rachels: differences in practices often explained by the severity of environment Infanticide in extreme environments may be necessary to preserve the group Lack of birth control PLUS severe scarcity of resources In this case, infanticide may reflect concern for the survival of other children
• • • • • •
Universal, Common Values Prohibition against murder How could a society function without such a prohibition? Telling the truth Communication presumes that people tell the truth – at least most of the time R: moral rules necessary for a society’s survival are UNIVERSAL
Case Study • A case study: female genital mutilation: “female circumcision,” “excision” • Much, if not all, of the female genitals are castrated – painful, disfiguring, often unsanitary • Fauziya escaped to America, but spent 18 months in jail while authorities decided what to do. P. 24 • Is this practice objectively wrong? Or should we “live and let live”? Case Study Notice: • Unlike some unusual practices (e.g., infanticide in extreme environments) • There is seemingly no social benefit • Consider the “reasons” given in defense: p. 25 Why are we reluctant to judge? 1) Nervousness about interfering in cultural traditions of others • Europeans have poor record with treatment of native cultures • BUT there is a difference between judging morality of a practice and imposing your culture on a group Why are we reluctant to judge? 2) Many wish to be tolerant and not racist • BUT tolerance does not require believing that all practices are morally equal 3) People are reluctant to show contempt for other cultures • BUT condemning a practice is not the same as condemning entire culture Five elements again 1) Different societies have different moral codes • This is true, but many values are universal, and differences sometimes disguise deeper similarities 2) The moral code of a society determines what is right in that society • We must distinguish what people believe from what is really true • Societies can be wrong about a moral issue. Examples: P. 27 3) There is no objective standard with which to judge a society’s moral code • This is false – there are objective standards (e.g., harm and benefit, the welfare of those affected) 4) The moral code of our society has no special status • This is true: some of our social practices may be immoral 5) It is arrogant for us to judge the conduct of other peoples – we must be tolerant • While tolerance is generally good, we should NOT be tolerant of everything! (E.g., slavery)
Notice also: (5) is self-contradictory – it judges those who judge others! If it is wrong to judge others, then it is wrong to judge those who judge others! Absolute toleration means that you cannot even judge those who are intolerant! C and K p. 607 • • •
• 2 lessons from cultural relativism 1) Reminds us that some of our own practices are may not be universal or morally correct • Some of what we assume are moral truths are really just our own social conventions • E.g., Janet Jackson’s “wardrobe malfunction.” P. 29 2) Provides an antidote to dogmatic prejudice • Realizing many of our values are just conventions we grew up with makes us more open-minded
