Benedict Discussion of Ethical Relativism

Benedict Discussion of Ethical Relativism

Anthropologists argue that ethical relativism relates one’s morality to the culture or norms of their society. For example, an action is either right or wrong depending on the moral norms and values of a person’s culture, or in the residing society’s. This does not mean that it is morally right in another because, for these ideologists, there is no such thing as universal moral standards that can be used everywhere at any given time. Ruth Benedict, an anthropologist, and writer, argued that the only standards that the practices of a society can be judged are its own. Skeptics argue that if this theory were correct, there would be no structure for solving moral disputes or for coming into agreements among people from different communities (Benedict, 1934).

She went further to describe normal behavior as one that falls justly within the boundaries of a specific community or society and is not found or based on universal moral codes. This is to mean that most of what societies consider normal is their daily cultural habits; therefore, moral goods and deeds are equal to the cultural norms of the people. This, in turn, meant that abnormal behaviors are those that were not normal but were culturally acceptable by another community. These abnormal behaviors are deemed so because society does not believe they positively affect the norms of living. Besides, people from the same society can hold different opinions on practices (Pearson, 1989).

In today’s world, an example of this happens when a neighbor, John, does not have any food and is very hungry; therefore, he goes to Silver, his neighbor, who has a field full of ripe fruits. However, Silver does not grant John permission to get some food from his farm. Walking away disappointedly and hungry, John has left no choice but to bite a mango which had fallen on the ground. This makes Silver report him to the community, after which John is shunned from society. In this case, it leaves one wondering who is sane and who is not.

Sartre Discussion on the Importance of Human Freedom

The notion of freedom has been in discussion determination by philosophers all over the world since the times of Locke and Stuart Mill. Jean-Paul Sartre deliberated that essence was preceded by existence. Such that even though at birth, we do not have control over choices, when we grow older, we have no choice but to make decisions that we believe will positively shape our future. He further explains that only by existence and having certain traits and behaviors, we have meanings in our lives. According to his works, human beings should be limitless as we are our impediments (Sartre, Mairet, 1960). If we believe, we should achieve anything; thus, our shortcomings as human beings fall ultimately on us. We should work to notice difficulties, discuss how to overcome them, by oneself, and then implement the action plans to eliminate the problem, only then will we fulfill our purpose in life.

In the story about the undecided young man, Sartre shows how the man encounters problems in society because he does not know he is ultimately going to be the shaper of his future. He is faced with the difficulty of making decisions because he does not know the severity of the repercussions of his actions to his fate. This though the young man believes there is no purpose or necessity for him to be alive, thus he decides that he will outdo his existence, which will lead to him truly knowing and assert his freedom. This shows Sartre’s view, such that the young man, in the end, has to find his purpose in life, to be free. Sartre believed and discussed that to be free, one has to go out of their boundaries.

To my belief in life, I believe the views of Sartre on existentialism have an impact on one’s life. This is because, without noticing problems, taking actions on them, and reviewing, we would not notice our strengths and weaknesses. We have to get out of our comfort zones and push beyond our limits to recognize personal freedom (Valle, Halling, 1989).

Nodding’s Discussion on Feminism and Ethics

Feminist ethics are approaches to ethics that focus on challenging traditional theories as male-centered, such that problems faced by females are not given as much attention, therefore mostly referred to as feminist views. An example of this case is how the male still views the females like the ones responsible for home duties such as washing, cleaning, and cooking. To me, this is a backward trend that should be stopped because; relationships require equal measures of input, without being forced, to work (Noddings, 2003).

I believe Nodding would have the same views because she has the same views on feminism and ethics. This would be really helpful to solve this problem that many homes and people face today. Most men would argue that they have more work to do at both work and home, including repairs, expansion of properties that females would find hard, or not do at all. Taking into consideration, the work a man can do, a female can do, this view on feminism should stop, and people should start encouraging men to allow females to be free to divide the labour as required, therefore no party would feel forced. This would foster growth in relationships all over the world and foster gender equality. However, this would make many homes unstable because most cultures view mothers as bearers and fathers as providers of dwellings. Yes, it is fair to make this distinction because it helps remove the feminist setting that has been normalized.

Yes, I believe she does add new ideas on my life, and my research because I now view all people equally. The previous thought I had on feminism, that its purpose was to do away with the male ideas and opinions are wiped. Now I view feminism as a tool that encourages world peace and freedom of all kinds. This because we will no longer view each other as enemies, but rather work to provide and build a better tomorrow. As Emma Watson stated, our individual efforts would help garner more female education and equal gender pay (CNN, 2014).

Robert’s Discussion on Morality

In the case of the Tower of Babel, Robert Kane explains that there were two consequences on conflicting morality. First is the urge to embrace relativism, since we believe there are no absolute values or las that hold anyone down always. Good and bad are only relative to people as per the society and it is not always. Secondly, it is because he believes that determinism is not compatible with alternative possibilities. This means that without reason, our actions would be random, but also some activities occur randomly without our knowledge or intentions (Luttio, Stone, 2016). Yes, I can relate this to my life because I believe without order, we humans would still be animals.

The story of “Perelandra” depicts the loss of moral innocence by displaying that Ransom, a male, sought out to find a new world, when he arrived he found beautiful, but strange people who seemed to live a care-free life. People who did not seem to know the feeling or notion of wrong or bad. The people from there never knew what it was to wrong; therefore, they never felt they had wronged anyone, but Ransom tried to explain to them that they had to know what was wrong and right. I had experienced this dilemma in my life when I was nearly forced to eat bacon when I had visited a farm in Paris. To them, it was like any meat, but to me, a Muslim, it was a taboo, and thus I had to explain to them why I could not eat the meat (Kane, 2017).

He explains the concept of “openness” by stating that to act freely, we do not have to follow any laws, but the actions we think and respond to ourselves, are the most important to our lives, and such actions are called self-forming actions. These mostly occur or reveal when we are at difficult times, thus torn on what to become or do. Mostly we do not have conclusive reasons for why we accept the choice (Kane, 2017).

These dialogues apply to our reading because we see how decisions made during difficult moments, shaped the lives of the people, as Robert Kane described we might never know what we could become until we are faced with a hard decision (Kane, 2017).

References

Benedict, R. (1934). A defense of Ethical Relativism. Journal of General Psychology, 10, 59-82.

CNN. (2014). Emma Watson to United Nations: I’m a feminist [Video]. Retrieved 24 March 2020, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9SUAcNlVQ4&feature=youtu.be.

Kane, R. (2017). Through the Moral Maze: Searching for Absolute Values in a Pluralistic World: Searching for Absolute Values in a Pluralistic World. Routledge.

Luttio, M., & Stone, S. (2016). Introduction to the Study of World Religions.

Noddings, N. (2003). Caring: a feminine approach to ethics and moral education. 1984. Google Scholar.

Pearson, R. (1989). Beyond ethical relativism in public relations: Coorientation, rules, and the idea of communication symmetry. Journal of Public Relations Research, 1(1-4), 67-86.

Sartre, J. P., & Mairet, P. (1960). Existentialism and humanism (p. 396). London: Methuen.

Valle, R. S., & Halling, S. E. (1989). Existential-phenomenological perspectives in psychology: Exploring the breadth of human experience. Plenum Press.