BLOGG 6

PART ONE

QUESTION #1: If an action that is praised in one culture may be condemned in another, would it be correct to say that all moral values are relative to the culture they are found in?
ANSWER 1A:
After reading the assign chapters out of Ruggiero’s text, I find that all moral values are relative to the culture they are found in. My first premise is the phrase cultural relativity. To me this means that each culture has developed its own set of values based off there experiences. Some one in Africa might not have experienced the same type of life of someone that lives in Russia. So based off that idea you can not expect both sets of people to view moral ideas the same. Ruggiero says in the text, “It derives from observation of cultural differences and two important realizations: (1)that culture’s values, rituals and customs reflect its geography, history and socioeconomic circumstances and (2) that hasty or facile comparison of other cultures with one’s own culture tends to thwart scholarly analysis and produce shallow or erroneous conclusions.” My second premise is a quote from Clyde Kluckhohn, “the principle of cultural relativity does not mean that because the members of some savage tribe are allowed to behave in a certain way that this fact gives intellectual warrant for such behavior in all groups…” This perfectly explains my conclusion because he is saying that something from one culture that is positive might be a negative thing in another culture.

ANSWER 1B:
P: the existence of the term cultural relativity.

P: Clyde Kluckhohn’s quote about how each culture has different values based on their personal habitat.
------------------------------

C: Therefore, it is correct to say that all moral values are relative to the culture they are found in.

QUESTION #2: Isn’t it a mark of ignorance to pass judgments on other cultures or to claim that one culture is better than another?
ANSWER 2A:
I feel it is a mark of ignorance to pass judgments on other cultures, or to claim that one culture is better than another. This is true to me because even if you feel that morally there is something wrong with a value that another culture has, you have not experiences the same things they have, so you cannot judge. In the text it says how “based on cultural relativism moral judgment of other cultures is never appropriate.” It is morally wrong to have negative opinions towards other cultures based on lack of experience in their territory. My second premise is, just because something is morally considered correct here, does not mean it is morally accepted in other cultures. Ruggiero brings up a good point, “If a pregnant American woman visits Germany, For example, does her fetus magically gain moral and legal rights?” I think this is a great example of how cultural relativism comes into effect. There is no possible way to create a “norm” for the entire world to follow.

ANSWER 2B:

P: lack of experience in other cultures leaves no place for judgment of them

P: just because something is morally considered correct here, does not mean it is morally accepted in other cultures.
-------------------------------
C: Therefore, it is a mark of ignorance to pass judgments on other cultures.

PART TWO

Argument #1:
I chose number 5, in some cultures; mutilation is considered an appropriate punishment for certain crimes. For example, if a man is caught stealing, his hand is cut off. Since such a punishment is unheard of in our culture, we tend to consider it morally insupportable.

Arguable issue: Is it morally insupportable to consider a punishment in another culture immoral because we see it that way in our culture?


P: Mutilation is wrong, even for punishment (cruel and unusual punishment)
P: Other means of punishment, imprisonment, are morally acceptable
P: Extreme punishment for a non extreme crime.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C: Therefore, you should not be able to mutilate people as a form of punishment.