How Does Cultural Relativism Imply Infallibility, the Unlikelihood of Disagreement

Question

Examlex · Accepted Answer

The Answer is Cultural relativism is the philosophical idea that all cultural beliefs are equally valid and that truth itself is relative, depending on the cultural environment. It suggests that one culture cannot rightfully judge the practices of another culture as "better" or "worse." When discussing cultural relativism in the context of morality, it implies that moral codes and ethical systems are bound to the cultural context from which they arise, and therefore, one cannot objectively criticize or evaluate them from the outside.

Here's how cultural relativism might imply infallibility, the unlikelihood of disagreement, and the impossibility of moral progress:

1. Infallibility:
Cultural relativism can imply infallibility within a cultural context because if all moral judgments are relative to cultural norms, then within a given culture, its moral norms cannot be wrong. Since there is no external standard to judge these norms against, they are effectively infallible within their own cultural context. This means that as long as a practice or belief aligns with cultural norms, it cannot be criticized as incorrect or unethical from within that culture.

2. Unlikelihood of Disagreement:
If cultural relativism holds true, then the likelihood of genuine moral disagreement between cultures is reduced. Since each culture is seen as having its own unique moral framework that is not subject to external evaluation, there is no common ground upon which to base a disagreement. What might be considered a moral issue in one culture may not be seen as such in another, leading to a situation where cultures simply have different practices rather than disagreeable ones. This does not mean that individuals within a culture cannot disagree, but rather that disagreements between cultures are not seen as conflicts over objective moral truths.

3. Impossibility of Moral Progress:
Under cultural relativism, the concept of moral progress is problematic because it implies a movement towards a more correct or better set of moral principles. However, if all moral systems are relative and no external standard exists to judge them, then the idea of progress makes little sense. Each culture's moral system is perfect as it is, and any changes would simply be different, not better or worse. This perspective can lead to a form of moral stagnation where practices are perpetuated simply because they are part of the cultural tradition, and not because they are the most ethical or beneficial.

In summary, cultural relativism, when applied strictly, can lead to a view where within a given culture, its moral norms are beyond reproach (infallibility), where cross-cultural moral disputes are seen as misunderstandings rather than genuine disagreements (unlikelihood of disagreement), and where the idea of improving or refining moral practices is nonsensical (impossibility of moral progress). Critics of cultural relativism argue that this view can prevent critical engagement with harmful practices and hinder efforts to improve human well-being across different societies.

How Does Cultural Relativism Imply Infallibility, the Unlikelihood of Disagreement

Definitions: