6. Explain the difference between cultural relativism and ethical relativism. Do you think that the fact that people disagree about moral right and wrong shows that ethical relativism is true?
In order to make the distinction between cultural relativism and ethical relativism, one must understand the term, the word that defines the study of morality—ethics. By definition ethics is a branch of philosophy that attempts decode which things are morally good, what actions are morally just, universally accepted (Vasquez). Ethics is the study of morality, the standards that an individual or a group has about what is right and wrong, good and evil, light and dark. Ethics allows the investigation of moral standards within a society, allowing questions to whether they are reasonable or unreasonable. Ethics is a justified hajj, a justified pilgrimage, a justified journey for the search of true morality.
Cultural relativism is an affirmation that holds that societies are dissimilar in their moral standards, their laws and culture protocols. To expand, cultural relativism holds that what one culture believes is immoral, another culture may believe is moral (Vasquez). In essence, cultural relativism is the view that morality is culture dependent. For example, Gaegogi, in English terms—dog meat, is considered a dish on the peninsula of South Korea. Due to the reason why there is a diversity of what is right or wrong among culture actions including slavery, polygamy, homosexuality, genocide, and numerous other topics, the term cultural relativism emerged.
Ethical relativism denies the existence of a one universal moral law. Ethical relativism supports the idea because cultures of societies are dissimilar in astronomical ways they accept, it follows that there is not one correct set of precepts everyone should adopt. According to the definition, instead, people should follow the moral laws and protocols that their own unique society sets forth or accepts. For instance, how the Western world is governed may not be appropriate (according to some viewers) for cultures in different cultures outside of the West.
Even though both cultural and ethical relativism sound similar, they do have inherited differences. Cultural relativism is seen as different societies that believe in different moralities. Cultural relativists see their view as a sociological fact where scholarly works proves the existence of different moralities. On the contrary, ethical relativists claim that the same action that is moral is immoral in another. For example, people living in the deserts of Saudi Arabia think that stoning a woman because she broke Sharia law (Islamic law) is not morally wrong, whereas people in the United States believe it is wrong. To surmise the difference between ethical relativism and cultural relativism is that in ethical relativism, whatever the denizens of a culture or society “think” is right for them to do is “in fact” what is right for them to do (Velasquez).
Because the fact that people disagree about moral right and wrong shows that ethical relativism is not true. There are several conflicts within ethical relativism. One problem emerges when one asks, “Is slavery morally right, if society as a whole accepts it?” The following are conflicts within the belief of ethical relativism: when there are two conflicting views on what is laws are morally just, which of the views are to be followed?; within ethical relativism, one has to accept society’s views and not question them; due to the fact that societies differ in moral laws they hold, it does not follow that there is one correct code of moral laws; there are universal moral values that societies must adopt in order to survive (Velasquez). However, even though ethical relativism inherits the preceding problems and conflicts, one of its main purposes is to knock down an approve solution for what a society believes is right and wrong. Due to the fact that people have come from different backgrounds and survived, no one, not one has the prerogative to say what is right or what is wrong.
x40553 
The only truth is that Melchezidek has the final say as to what is moral. Man is immoral and his compass is off kilter.
It is true that different cultures have different beliefs and if you dont follow there beliefs that have the right fo punish this person even if they are not from their. Cutures.
“cultural relativism is the view that morality is culture dependent” – paragraph 2
“The difference between the two is that in ethical relativism, whatever the denizens of a culture believe is right, is in fact right” – paragraph 4
This seems like the same thing to me I’m confused
So ethical relativism is more to a certain specific society group it does not cares about how a rights or wrong is define is ethical according to the defination of that particular individual. . While Cultural relativism does not favour a certain specific it promotes fair and good judgement to All nations. Which is a respect , value and promotes the spirit of Ubuntu across the board.
I think this was written by a very biased person which shows that the truth about what is being said in the article is not based solely on the fact of the definitions of the what Cultural Relativism and Ethical Relativism and examples of them but is used 2 examples that say Sharia law is ok and the United States is wrong for disagreeing with it. That shows a bias of the writer and then they move onto using slavery as another example that is intended to cause you forget the first inclination and only think about the latter. I do not believe in Slavery and it was wrong that it happened in the United States but let us not forget that Slavery still exists on the Continent of Africa by the hands of their own people. And as for the example of Sharia law and the United States not agreeing with it, is because as a society we have a separation in our judicial system that does not allow a religious law govern. That is what Sharia law is it is a religious law that governs countries where Islam is the majority/only religion allowed. Please make this a more factual not personally biased. I am here to learn about cultures of humans, not political science classes for political agendas.
I think you misunderstood the points, and took the examples too literal. Also, Africa is a very big continent and should not be defined as a point of contact for enslavement of all kind, so stating you don’t support slavery, but asking us not to forget the actions of the continent where the slaves were mainly taken from just defeats the validity of any point you were trying to make in the first place; there really isn’t a correlation. Let’s be frank the US isn’t that separated in church and state and the judicial system is political. Good luck “objectivity helps fyi”
The moral of the story the way I seeing it is take the United states constitution and the Amendments, When it was first written and states were being parted to consist of america one state did not want to be part of the rest of america and chose to remain confederate while the rest are federal. The one state did not want to be federal because it did not like the rules of becoming a non confederate state, but now presently they are getting federal help.and the people been moving abroad. case and point if people stay put in one place they tend to believe they would not be respected or excepted for their wants and beliefs and that is untrue because the constitution represents land of the free of diverse equality..Ethical and cultural relativism.
Hi Jason! Thank you for sharing your outlook on this information. I totally agree with you feeling as though a bias person wrote this article. I also do not agree with slavery and find it heartbreaking that it happened in the United States. Like you said though, it is still practiced in South Africa by its own people. Kind of crazy. Thank you for sharing with us and good luck on your learning journey.
Moral claims are cognitively meaningful,but because of certain reasons we cannot assert that moral claims are universal, objective, and common to all.
Therefore, where as cultural relativism dwells on the differences in cultures, ethical relativism is of the view that moral claims make sense, but the criterion of their truth or falsity is based on the individual. This is the reason why Protagoras said that, “man is the measure of all things”
I have learned a lot from this article on cultural relative and ethical relativism and the difference between the two. Ok a group of people who are either the same race and country can have their own laws and ways of living. And even though you nor I may not approve of the life style. It is expected and there’s nothing wrong with the way they grow and was taught how to live this way it’s their culture and tradition. I may have a different ethical standards about how another country’s out looks and their beliefs on the way their culture may allow them to marry a child. I have a problem with that. Because I wasn’t brought up to be that way.
The that was a great article I really enjoyed reading it I learned so much you help me to understand you’re different between the two terms ethics and cultural relativism thank you for the knowledge.