Wednesday, March 3, 2010

Cultural Morality....really?

Last week in class a thoughtful student asked me a question, and in that question laid out his struggle with how he could not determine how he was to counter an atheist that firmly believed in cultural relativism. He explained how he noticed how, logically, cultural relativism could have come into existence given a godless world. In the evolutionary mindset, the cultural pressures and societal norms quickly form into firm “laws” that the members of that society are supposed to follow. Of course, all of us could image what would happen if we become stranded on a secluded island with 10 strangers. Pretty quickly a set of “ground rules” would be established of what is acceptable and not.


I spent most of my time during my response to this student trying to prove that this view of cultural relativism really doesn’t hold any water, but I think I missed a strategic opportunity. It doesn’t matter if the story of the origin of these laws is cohesive or not, the fact of the matter is that cultural relativism is hardly applicable. In other words, the answer to his question shouldn’t have focused on the origin of these laws (which neither side can 100% prove), but rather how or why we feel that cultural relativists think they can hold people accountable and even punishable?

For instance, take an individual who believes that humans should be able to live clothes-free publically. As an act of liberation the individual lives out this principle at a nearby mall where he is quickly detained and eventually punished for this act. But by what right do we punish? If this individual was simply living out their humble beliefs and embracing the freedom to do so, then why/how can we punish them? Is it simply because there are more of us than this individual?

In the past few weeks the television reporters have uttered a name that is now synonymous with infamy: Tiger Woods. Due to the aftershock of this revelation, there is no doubt that the American people still agree that adultery is immoral. But what right do we have to judge Tiger? Maybe he’s a part of a subculture that thinks that this sort of thing is not merely fashionable or pleasurable, but rather, it’s moral and acceptable. What right do we have to judge if cultural morality is the only standard? Is it just because there are more of us than there are of Tiger and his subculture?

It would seem that unless there are absolutes then there is no objective standard to make such judgments (or to have any sense of “rights” for that matter) and to hold people accountable, and yes even punishable, for certain immoral actions.

Please feel free to comment!