descriptive relativism and ethical relativism

Part A: Summarize descriptive relativism and ethical relativism. Describe the important differences and similarities between the two.

Part B: Do you endorse either descriptive relativism or ethical relativism? If yes, which do you endorse and why? Why do you reject the competing view of relativism? If you endorse neither of these positions, why do you reject them both?

1. Section 7.3: Do Consequences Make an Action Right?Part A: Outline Jeremy Bentham’s “seven circumstances” to measure the amount of pleasure and pain that an action produces. In what way does Bentham believe that this calculus is relevant to the morality of the action in question? What reasons does Bentham give for his view?Part B: Do you agree with Bentham’s view of what makes an action right? Outline one practical problem that you can see for its application. Outline one theoretical problem that you think this view might be faced with. Do you think that these difficulties could be overcome? Why or why not?
2. Section 7.4: Do Rules Define Morality?Part A: Outline Immanuel Kant’s first formulation of the categorical imperative. Outline Kant’s second formulation of the categorical imperative. Provide an example of how each formulation identifies an action as morally wrong.Part B: Do you believe that Kant’s categorical imperative is the correct account of what makes an action right or wrong? Argue for your view.
3. Section 7.5: Is Ethics Based on Character?Part A: Outline Aristotle’s account of ethics. What does he mean by “the mean”? Why is Aristotle’s account of morality called “virtue ethics”?Part B: In what important respects does Aristotle’s account of ethics differ from that of Mill and Kant? Which approach do you find most plausible and why?

Summarize descriptive relativism and ethical relativism. Describe the important differences and similarities between the two.

Introduction

Descriptive relativism is the position that all cultures have a right to exist and that no culture has the right to subjugate or oppress another. Ethical relativism is the position that there are no absolute principles of morality, including such things as “ought” and “right.” Descriptive relativism says that all cultures are valid and ethical relativism says that no culture has the right to subjugate or oppress another culture.

Descriptive relativism is the position that all cultures have a right to exist and that no culture has the right to subjugate or oppress another.

Descriptive relativism is the position that all cultures have a right to exist and that no culture has the right to subjugate or oppress another. This philosophical position is often contrasted with other ethical philosophies, such as ethical absolutism, which holds that one’s actions should be based on absolute moral principles.

Ethical relativism is the position that there are no absolute principles of morality, including such things as “ought” and “right.”

Ethical relativism is the position that there are no absolute principles of morality, including such things as “ought” and “right.” In other words, ethical relativism holds that there is no such thing as an objective standard or rule by which one can judge whether something is right or wrong.

Richard Rorty, who was influenced by Ludwig Wittgenstein’s work on language games (a concept he used in his book Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature), argued against ethical absolutism on the grounds that it leads to dogmatism: “The function of thought experiments in science is not only to give us some ideas about what might happen under certain conditions; they also force us into assuming a universe where everything makes sense.”

Descriptive relativism says that all cultures are valid and descriptive relativism says that no culture has the right to subjugate or oppress another culture.

Descriptive relativism says that all cultures are valid and descriptive relativism says that no culture has the right to subjugate or oppress another culture.

Ethical relativism is the position that there are no absolute principles of morality, including such things as “ought” and “right.”

Ethical relativism says there are no absolute principles of morality, including such things as “ought” and “right.”

Ethical relativism is the idea that there are no absolute principles of morality, including such things as “ought” and “right.” Ethical skepticism is the position that claims of moral truth cannot be proven correct, but must be accepted on faith.

A common example of ethical relativism would be to say that murder is wrong because we feel it’s wrong—but why? Why do we have this feeling? And what justifies it?

Ethical relativism also allows us to have different moralities within a single culture or society; for example, if one person says stealing doesn’t count as stealing while another says it does count as theft (and they both believe they’re right), then each individual has their own way of defining what counts as theft based on their personal beliefs rather than universal laws which apply across cultures equally well everywhere at all times in history.

Descriptive relativism and ethical relativism are two ways of approaching questions about cultural values.

Descriptive relativism is the position that all cultures have a right to exist and that no culture has the right to subjugate or oppress another. Ethical relativism is the position that there are no absolute principles of morality, including such things as “ought” and “right.” In other words, ethical relativism leaves open questions about which principles are truly moral. It also leaves open questions about which values should be considered more important than others—for example: Is it more important for me as an individual student to study hard or make sure my friend gets help with her homework?

In addition to these two major positions on ethics and morality, there are several other flavors of non-absolute aspects of our lives. For instance:

• Social constructionism looks at how individuals construct their own identities through their interactions with others (i.e., what kind of person we think we are).
• Postmodernism suggests that nothing exists independently from culture; everything depends on perspective (i..e., what matters varies depending on who’s doing the looking).

Conclusion

Descriptive relativism and ethical relativism are two ways of approaching questions about cultural values. The fundamental difference between them is that ethical relativism holds that there are no absolute principles of morality, while descriptive relativism says that all cultures are valid and descriptive relativism says that no culture has the right to subjugate or oppress another culture. Descriptive relativism is preferable because it avoids the problems of ethical relativists who refuse to make any judgments on whether a given practice is right or wrong; however, ethical relativists do not necessarily object to this claim as well since they recognize it may be useful in order for people from different cultures to understand one another better.