Secondly, moral absolutes do exist. The final body paragraph will counter the supporting arguments by clarifying that absolute objective truths do not exist as moral truth can be universal but not absolute as every culture has the opportunity to hold the same moral truth and the opportunity to be tolerant of all societies. To reply, a current example that is relevant today is provided to show that theoretically the counter argument is strong, but practically Sumner’s statement is not possible. Cultural relativism is the theory that a person's culture strongly influences an individual’s mode of perception and thought (“Relativism”, 2014). The principle claims that there are no objective truth or values as morality is relative to each society or culture.
It is described by Structural Anthropologist Edmund Leach as follows: "Positivism is the view that serious scientific inquiry should not search for ultimate causes deriving from some outside source but must confine itself to the study of relations existing between facts which are directly accessible to observation. "(Sic) Sociological Positivism (hereafter “Positivism”) is guided by the following principles. Firstly, the scientific method must be used. Secondly, the goal of inquiry is to explain and predict. Also, scientific knowledge is testable; research must me able to be empirically proved and be observable with human senses.
"the anthropologist must be on guard against imposing outside categories on the host culture in which she is working". Nowak, B., & Laird, P. (2010) 3. Epistemological position a) Strengths- able to look at the culture with a blank slate. Removes barriers to normal thinking and beliefs. b)Weakness- Harder to find unique cultures that have not been influenced by globalization.
Ethical relativism is supported due to the narrowing view of ethnocentrism, which is causing great “prejudice tantamount to racism and sexism” (Pojman, 25). Society is moving away from their ethnocentric view of the world, which allows for a more diverse cultural of right and wrong. Moral positions are based on what their society sees as ideal norms. The first of two theses is cultural relativism, “what is considered morally right and wrong varies from society to society”(Pojman, 26), meaning that there is no universal morals, which are accepted by all societies. In some cultures it might be morally acceptable to value slavery, genocide, or female circumcision.
Our generation is not simply more self-centered or less moral than our predecessors. I contend that this appearance of moral degeneration is more accurately perceived as moral confusion. When we ask why individuals act unethically, we must also be prepared to ask why it is that our ethics make it seem to be in the individual self-interest to do so. Because our common morality limits our freedom to behave in ways we might otherwise choose to, it
Then, how can we determine what is okay from that which is not according to our human nature? The nature of human beings is a very complex definition. What human nature may mean to me may not fit with one’s ethical reasoning of what human nature means to another. In this regard, however, human nature to me is anything in which the person freely chooses to do, think, and act on. However, going back to human nature and ethics, we need to clearly define that although human nature differs among different cultures and societies, human nature must not be raped of its value for choosing good, and behaving on what brings the best solution for one’s problems in life.
Cultural Relativism: A Method of Thinking that Changes Social Science The idea of cultural relativism is not only a step forward for sociologists and anthropologists because it offers a more unbiased view of human societies, but it is an improved standard of evaluating these different cultures. Cultural relativism is the idea that when examining other cultures and peoples, the observer is conscious to not impose their own culture’s understanding to the practices witnessed. Without this approach, scientists studying other humans would not be able to explain all of the behaviors because these actions are foreign to their own lifestyle. Instead, the observer might try to evaluate the group of people from the people’s own point of view. For example, an anthropologist might interview a member of the society to gauge their overall happiness, or ask how the needs of the community are met.
Some people, especially psychologists, believe that the best way to give advice to our friends, family and other people is to identify what they want and then advising them about how to reach that they desire. However, other people, including psychoanalysts, think that it is not necessary to find out the interests and goals of the people who are asking us an advice. As you can see, this issue is a controversial one but a closer examination reveals that identifying what people want is mandatory in order to give a good advice. My reasons are the following: First, if we don’t identify what people want, probably we will give a wrong advice. In other words, if we don’t consider the motivations of these people who look for an advice, probably we will advise them based on our personal desires and goals, which probably may be the opposite of these people want.
Discuss the contributions of the cultural bias issue in psychological research (25 Marks) A cultural bias usually occurs when people from one culture makes assumptions and stereotypes about the behaviour of those from another culture based on their own cultural norms and practices. For example, an individual from a western society such as England may assume that people from the Middle East such as Iraq are all Muslims. There are different branches of Cultural Bias: Cultural Bias Religion and Beliefs Imposed Etics Language Barrier In cultural bias, we have emics and etics. And Emic is a concept that can be universally applied and not specific to a certain society e.g. Family.
POUDEL KRISHNA “The Golden Rule” is about treating people the way a person likes to be treated. It intends to promote empathy. It is also called the ethic of reciprocity. However, the golden rule is not a guarantee that one will get ideal treatment. This rule is just a hope (possibility) that someday each person will treat everyone else with kindness and will receive kindness from others.