What Philosophy Is

Moral Conventionalism

As you read the material for the next class, keep the questions below in mind. To answer these questions you will have to reflect critically on what you have read and possibly re-read important passages. Keep in mind that there are two basic kinds of information that you need to look for in the readings.

  1. What are the main points or conclusions that an author accepts with respect to a particular issue?
  2. What are the reasons or important considerations that lead the author to accept that conclusion?

For our purposes, it is information of the latter sort (2) that will be our primary concern since our most basic task is to evaluate the reasons that are offered to support accepting one possible conclusion about an issue, rather than another.

Although I strongly suggest that you write out brief answers to these questions, you do not have to turn in written responses. You do, however, need to be prepared to speak intelligently to these issues in the next class meeting. Also, it is reasonable to assume that the final exam’s questions will be drawn from these questions—particularly those in bold.

Readings:

  • Ruth Benedict, “Anthropology and the Abnormal” (handout).
  • James Rachels, “The Challenge of Cultural Relativism” from Stephen M. Cahn (ed.), Philosophy for the 21st Century, pp. 594-602.

Questions:

  1. What does Ruth Benedict mean by saying that “morality differs in every society, and is a convenient term for socially approved habits”? According to Benedict, why can’t I, as an American, criticize the bereavement traditions of the Kwakiutl?
  2. Why does James Rachels claim the Cultural Differences Argument is unsound? What unsettling consequences of cultural relativism does he identify? Why does he believe that all cultures must hold some values in common? Why might it not be intolerant for Americans to criticize female circumcision/genital mutilation?
  3. Benedict and Rachels cannot both be right. While both share some of the same premises (e.g., that different cultures have different customs), they have different conclusions. Therefore, where exactly in their respective arguments do they disagree? Which position is supported by the strongest and most compelling argument?

 

I love Apache! So should you!