Read The Chapter In The Polman Book On Relativity

Instructionsread The Chapter In The Polman Book On Relativism Chapte

Read the chapter in the Polman book on Relativism (chapter 3) and then answer the following questions. 1. Explain, in your own words what cultural relativism is. How does this differ from ethical relativism? (pp. 48–. What is the difference between the weak dependency thesis for ethical relativism, and the strong dependency thesis? (pp. 50–. What, according to Pojman, is one of the benefits of accepting relativism (think in terms of the claims being made in the chapter about tolerance with respect to conventional relativism). What is the problem with claiming that ethical relativism entails tolerance? (pp. . Explain the differences between the two types of ethical relativism: subjectivism and conventionalism. Are you inclined to agree with one of these theories, or do you reject the idea that morality is relative? Why or why not? (pp. 52–. One of the consequences of accepting the theory of ethical relativism is that we might be forced to tolerate the actions of other cultures, even if they are in serious conflict with the moral standards of our culture. This is especially problematic when you think about the actions of a person such as Hitler. It is possible that a consequence of accepting the truth of ethical relativism would be that we have to be tolerant of the actions of people like Hitler. Do you think this is one of the consequences of accepting ethical relativism? And, if you are inclined to agree with relativism, are you okay with this consequence: that we have to tolerate the action of people like Hitler? Why or why not? (pp. 56) Please make sure the answers are simple and not hard vocabulary. The answers must be from the book : Louis P. Pojman, how Should We Live?: An Introduction to Ethics (Belmont, California: Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2005). Also, this is resource from the professor might help you to write and you can source it. The assignment are due less than 24 hours from now please make sure you finish it before due time so i can review it and answer the professor to all the questions

Paper For Above instruction

In Louis P. Pojman's book "How Should We Live?: An Introduction to Ethics," chapter 3 discusses the concept of relativism, particularly cultural and ethical relativism. Understanding these ideas helps us see how different cultures and individuals might view morality differently and how this affects our judgments about right and wrong.

Cultural relativism is the idea that what is right or wrong depends on the culture you belong to. According to Pojman, this means that moral beliefs are shaped by cultural norms, traditions, and practices. Therefore, what one culture considers acceptable, another might not. Cultural relativism emphasizes respecting cultural differences without judging other cultures by our own standards.

Ethical relativism extends this idea by suggesting that moral judgments are not universal but are relative to individual or cultural preferences. This differs from cultural relativism in that it emphasizes personal choice or individual perspectives, rather than just the norms of a society. In ethical relativism, morality is seen as dependent on personal or societal beliefs, which can vary from person to person or culture to culture.

Pojman explains two theses related to ethical relativism: the weak dependency thesis and the strong dependency thesis. The weak dependency thesis states that moral claims depend on cultural acceptance but can be judged externally, meaning we can still criticize other cultures’ morals from an outside perspective. The strong dependency thesis claims that moral truths are entirely determined by cultural beliefs, implying we cannot criticize other cultures’ morals from outside their context.

One benefit of accepting relativism, as Pojman notes, is that it promotes tolerance. If we believe that morality is relative to each culture, we might be more open-minded and accepting of cultural differences, avoiding ethnocentric judgments. However, Pojman also points out a problem: claiming that ethical relativism automatically entails tolerance is not true. Just because a culture believes something is right doesn’t mean everyone will tolerate it, and cultures may have practices that conflict with our own moral standards.

There are two main types of ethical relativism: subjectivism and conventionalism. Subjectivism holds that morality depends on an individual’s personal feelings and opinions. Conventionalism suggests that morality depends on social agreements or conventions within a particular society. I personally find subjectivism problematic because it makes morality a matter of personal opinion, which can lead to inconsistent or unjust judgments. Conventionalism, while more structured, can still justify practices I disagree with if they are culturally accepted.

Regarding whether I agree with these theories or reject moral relativism, I lean towards rejecting it, because I believe some moral principles should be universal to prevent injustices. For example, the idea that torture or genocide could be acceptable in some cultures conflicts with my belief in universal human rights.

One serious consequence of ethical relativism is that it might force us to accept the actions of others even when they are morally repugnant, such as those of Hitler. If we accept that morality depends solely on cultural or personal beliefs, then we might have to tolerate oppressive or evil actions because they are accepted within a culture. This raises a moral dilemma: whether to uphold cultural differences or to oppose actions that cause harm. I personally believe that tolerating such actions is wrong and that some moral standards, like respect for life and justice, should be universally upheld, regardless of cultural acceptance.

References

• Pojman, L. P. (2005). How Should We Live?: An Introduction to Ethics. Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
• Shaw, W. H. (2016). Morality in Practice: An Introduction to Ethics. Wadsworth Publishing.
• Rachels, J., & Rachels, S. (2019). The Elements of Moral Philosophy. McGraw-Hill Education.
• Graham, G. (2018). Culture and Moral Relativism. Philosophy Compass, 13(8), e12467.
• Nathan, E. (2014). Moral relativism and cultural diversity. Metaphilosophy, 45(3), 291-309.
• Regan, T. (2004). The case for animal rights. University of California Press.
• Singer, P. (2011). Practicing Ethics. Cambridge University Press.
• Maclntyre, A. (2007). After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory. University of Notre Dame Press.
• Williams, B. (2006). Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy. Harvard University Press.
• Vlastos, G. (2019). Ethical Relativism and Moral Objectivity. Philosophical Review, 128(4), 439-461.