How would you state James Rachels main thesis?

Rachels states that Cultural Relativists would say eating the dead is neither objectively right nor wrong because eating the dead is a matter of opinion. Rachels argues that this does not follow the cultural differences argument because there is simply no objective truth in geography.

What is the thesis of cultural relativism?

Cultural relativism, the theory that what is morally right and wrong depends only on one’s culture, attempts to address the variance in ethical standards across cultures.

What is the main purpose of James Rachels the challenge of cultural relativism?

The article “The Challenge of Cultural Relativism” by Rachels explores the issue of ethics. According to the article, moral philosophy focuses on the issues that can steer an acceptable life. The term “cultural relativism” describes the moral codes embraced by different societal groups.

What does James Rachels think about cultural relativism?

Rachels as well believes that “certain basic values are common to all cultures.” I agree with Rachels in that culture relativism cannot assure us that there is no knowledge of what is right or wrong. I believe that different cultures must know what is right and what is wrong to do.

What is Rachels main objection to the cultural differences argument?

Rachels thinks it makes no sense to condemn some societies as inferior to our own. Rachels believes that all cultural practices can be tested against a rational standard of rightness or wrongness.

What does James Rachels in the challenge of cultural relativism think that we can learn from cultural relativism?

From cultural relativism, Rachels argues, we can learn: According to Rachels, the fact that different cultures have different moral codes implies that moral values lack objective truth.

What is Rachels objection to the cultural differences argument?

What are the challenges of cultural relativism explain?

Cultural Relativism, as it has been called, challenges our ordinary belief in the objectivity and universality of moral truth. It says, in effect, that there is not such thing as universal truth in ethics; there are only the various cultural codes, and nothing more.

What we can learn from cultural relativism by James Rachels?

According to James Rachels, Cultural Relativism, as it has been called, challenges our ordinary belief in the objectivity and universality of moral truth. It says, in effect, that there is no such thing as universal truth in ethics; there are only the various cultural codes, and nothing more.

What does Rachels think are among the bad consequences of cultural moral relativism?

cultural differences argument-different cultures have different moral beliefs so there is no absolute truth with regard to moral beliefs. Rachels argues that cultural relativism has some consequences that make people “reject it as implausible on its face”.

Do you think Rachels agrees with or disagrees with cultural relativism?

Rachels begins by stating that since different cultures have different morals, it is unfair to use our own ideals as a guideline. However, Rachels goes on to discredit cultural relativism because the premise of one’s argument concerns what people believe, but the conclusion doesn’t follow logically.

Which of the following is one of the consequences of cultural relativism which Rachels points out?

Moral codes of one society are relative in relation to others, but absolute in one’s own culture. One of the consequences of accepting Cultural Relativism, according to Rachels, is that we cannot note that we have progressed or regressed from the past.