Assignment 2: Ethical Moral Relativism In America Many Are C

Assignment 2: Ethical Moral Relativismin America Many Are Comfortab

In this paper, I will explore and define two prominent forms of moral relativism—individual moral relativism and cultural moral relativism—analyzing their differences, strengths, and weaknesses. Furthermore, I will examine Lawrence Kohlberg’s stance on ethical relativism, particularly his claim that cultural relativists are stuck at the "Conventional Stage" of moral development. I will also articulate my personal position on ethical relativism, supporting my views with relevant scholarly references and a personal ethical dilemma example, demonstrating how my moral decisions align or conflict with relativistic perspectives.

Understanding Individual and Cultural Moral Relativism

Individual moral relativism posits that moral judgments are subjective and vary from person to person, based on personal feelings, preferences, and experiences. This perspective rejects the idea of universal moral truths, emphasizing personal autonomy in ethical decision-making. For example, an individual might believe that euthanasia is morally acceptable because it aligns with their values of autonomy and compassion, while another might consider it wrong due to different personal beliefs (Rachels, 2003).

In contrast, cultural moral relativism places emphasis on societal norms and cultural practices as the foundation for moral judgments. It argues that morality is relative to cultural context, and what is considered morally right in one society might be unacceptable in another. For instance, certain cultures practice arranged marriages, which might be seen as morally acceptable within their cultural framework, though they might be judged negatively outside that context (Benedict, 1934). Both forms of relativism challenge the existence of universal morality, but they differ primarily in their focal point—individual feelings versus collective cultural norms.

One key difference is that individual relativism prioritizes personal moral judgment, whereas cultural relativism emphasizes societal consensus. Strengths of individual relativism include respect for personal freedom and diversity of moral perspectives. However, its weakness lies in potential moral chaos because there is no shared moral standard to resolve conflicts. Cultural relativism's strength is its recognition of cultural diversity and the importance of societal context but can lead to ethical paralysis where harmful practices are justified because they are culturally accepted (Kohlberg, 1984).

Kohlberg’s Position on Ethical Relativism and Personal Reflection

Lawrence Kohlberg critiqued cultural moral relativism by asserting that such a stance indicates individuals are stuck at the "Conventional Stage" of moral development, where morality is based on conformity to social rules and authority figures. He believed that moral growth involved progressing to the "Post-Conventional Stage," where universal ethical principles, such as justice and human rights, become guiding standards (Kohlberg, 1981). I agree with Kohlberg’s view that ethical development should transcend mere cultural conformity, aiming for universal moral principles that accommodate diversity yet promote fairness and human dignity.

Nevertheless, I also acknowledge some validity in the relativist perspective, especially in respecting cultural differences and avoiding ethnocentric judgments. For example, respecting cultural practices such as dietary restrictions or traditional ceremonies aligns with my belief in cultural relativism's recognition of context-sensitive morality. I find that ethical relativism encourages openness and humility, qualities essential for genuine intercultural understanding (Beauchamp & Childress, 2013).

On the other hand, I disagree with the idea that all cultural practices are morally equivalent, particularly when they violate basic human rights, such as practices involving child labor or gender discrimination. These issues highlight the limitations of relativism in upholding universal rights.

Personal Ethical Perspective and Dilemma

Personally, I subscribe to a balanced understanding—appreciating cultural diversity while recognizing some universal ethical standards. An ethical dilemma I faced involved choosing whether to report a cultural practice my neighbor engaged in, which involved a minor aspect of illegal work. While respecting their cultural background, I had to consider the harm involved. I decided to notify authorities, believing that protecting vulnerable individuals aligned with universal principles of justice and human rights, despite the cultural context. This decision reflects my belief that ethics support protecting fundamental rights over cultural practices that cause harm.

Conclusion

In summary, individual moral relativism emphasizes personal feelings and autonomy, while cultural moral relativism underscores societal norms and practices. Both perspectives present strengths and limitations, with Kohlberg criticizing cultural relativism for hindering moral development beyond conformist stages. I advocate for a moral outlook that respects cultural differences but upholds universal human rights, illustrating that ethical growth involves balancing cultural sensitivity with moral universality. This approach fosters respectful coexistence grounded in shared principles of justice and dignity.

References

• Benedict, R. (1934). Patterns of Culture. Houghton Mifflin.
• Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2013). Principles of Biomedical Ethics. Oxford University Press.
• Kohlberg, L. (1981). Essays on Moral Development, Vol. I: The Philosophy of Moral Development. Harper & Row.
• Kohlberg, L. (1984). The psychology of moral development: Moral stages and the ethics of care. Harper & Row.
• Rachels, J. (2003). The Elements of Moral Philosophy. McGraw-Hill Education.