[3.] Moral-Cultural Relativism.

 

[3.1.] A Rough Statement of the Theory.

 

Suppose that some actions are morally right and that other actions are morally wrong.

 

If this is correct, then we are faced with the question: What makes an action morally right or morally wrong?

 

Different theories of morality answer this question in different ways. According to the next theory we will consider, whether an action is morally right or morally wrong is determined by the beliefs and attitudes that people have in the society within which the action is performed. This theory says that whatever behaviors are believed to be right or wrong by the members of a society are right or wrong within that society; i.e., morality is relative to culture. This a very rough statement of the theory known as moral-cultural relativism (MCR). [We will see a more detailed statement of the theory below.]

 

There is an important connection between MCR and a theory we’ve already studied: moral skepticism, according to which there is no such thing as objective moral truth.

 

The connection is this: MCR implies moral skepticism. In other words, if morality really does depend on nothing but what people in a given society believe about morality, then there is no such thing as objective morality. (We will return to this point later.)

 

 

[3.2.] Relativity.

 

What does it mean to say that one thing is relative to another?  It means that the one thing depends on the other in some important way. E.g.

• left and right are relative to direction (e.g., UWG’s location relative to I-20: if you’re driving east on I-20, then UWG is to your right; but if you’re driving west on I-20, UWG is on your left; the question “What side of I-20 is it on, period?” doesn’t make sense)

 

MCR says something analogous about morality: Whether a given action is morally right or morally wrong is relative to the culture of one’s society; more specifically, morality is relative to what people in one’s society believe about morality.

 

 

[3.3.] “Moral-Cultural Relativism” vs. “Cultural Relativism.”

 

Sometimes, MCR is referred to simply as “cultural relativism.” But the name “cultural relativism” is used to refer to a number of different theories. Most of these theories claim that something is relative to (dependent on) one’s culture or society. But not all of them refer specifically to morality. One claims that standards of evidence are relative to one’s society; another claims that all truths (not just moral, but historical, scientific, etc.) are relative to one’s culture. When you hear someone refer simply to “cultural relativism,” you should ask: exactly what theory do you mean? What does the theory say is relative to culture: morality, standards of evidence, truth, or something else?  Notice that Rachels refers simply to “cultural relativism” —but he means the theory I am calling MCR.

 

 

[3.4.] An Example: Polygamy.

 

polygamy (df.): having more than one spouse or mate at a time; more often than not, this involves one man having multiple wives.

·         polygamy is thought to be morally permissible in some societies (and in some segments of American society) but is thought to be morally wrong in others.

·         it is estimated that between 20,000 and 100,000 people in the United States (many of them in Utah and Arizona) engage in polygamy.[1]

 

According to MCR, there is no truth of the matter about whether polygamy is right or wrong universally, just like there is no truth of the matter about whether UWG is on the left or the right of I-20, universally. According to MCR, whether polygamy is right or wrong depends on the society in question. In some societies, it is morally permissible; in others it is immoral; and that’s all there is to it.

 

 

Stopping point for Wednesday August 26. For next time, read EMP pp.19-25. As always, you might have a pop quiz over this reading and over today’s lecture notes.