BLOG #6. Comparing Cultures

ASSIGNMENTThe two questions below are from the title section, at the beginning of chapter five, in the Ruggiero text. Please answer them in prose (written out) form, in your own words, to the best of your ability. Use what you learned from the assigned readings to construct your answers. You must provide at least one full paragraph each, and an example, and then you must put your answer in equation form. I will model both the equation form and the conclusion this time (you choose which conclusion suits your position); you must fill in the premises (as many as you consider enough).Try to base your conclusion on at least one premise that consists of a moral principle, as in “X should always Y” or “X is good” or “We ought to X”. In other words, “X should always Y” is the symbolic form of a statement like, “We should always tell the truth”. Or the claim, “We should always respect other cultures”. And so on.
--------------------------------------------------------------
PART ONE
--------------------------------------------------------------

QUESTION #1: If an action that is praised in one culture may be condemned in another, would it be correct to say that all moral values are relative to the culture they are found in?



ANSWER 1A: No, I think that would be a simplistic way to approach the problem of morals and cultural norms. This issue is crucial in our search for a standard ethical judgment. When an action is praised in one culture and condemned in another, it should send up a red flag for anyone who notices the difference. There are some things that just don't hold up to scrutiny even after many years have passed and the circumstances of the situation are revealed.

P: Human life should always be respected.

P: The sick and elderly deserve fair treatment.

P: Women deserve the same respect as men.

C: Therefore, it is not correct to say that all moral values are relative to the culture they are found in.
------------------------------


QUESTION #2: Isn’t it a mark of ignorance to pass judgments on other cultures or to claim that one culture is better than another?



ANSWER 2A: No, it is not a mark of ignorance to pass judgment on another culture. The notion of multicultural acceptance is a flawed theory. At some point you have to take a stand - either for or against - you can't ride the fence on every issue. Sure, there are some things that are trivial and not deserving of a lot of time and attention, but there are other issues that are just plain wrong no matter how you look at them. I still take offense when the issue of slavery is brought up and the first thing that people thing of is the ignorant southerners keeping black slaves on the plantations. That was wrong, very wrong, but it was just as wrong several thousand years ago (Egypt, Greece, Europe...) as it is today, by all countries involved. I believe that all of our cultures share some similarity in their values and we should examine how most of the cultures behave in order to come up with a standard that is more acceptable by all.

P: Passing judgment without reviewing the facts is ignorant.

P: Passing judgment is right and prudent to save innocent lives.

C: Therefore, it is not a mark of ignorance to pass judgments on other cultures.

--------------------------------------





--------------------------------------------------------------
PART TWO
--------------------------------------------------------------

See page 63 in our text. Choose one inquiry, from inquiries 3 – 11. Briefly describe the inquiry as the first part of your answer, so your readers know which one you chose. Discuss whether or not the action / decision in each case is ethical. And then, put your argument in equation form. Try to include an ethical principle as one of your premises, as modeled below...

Mutilation as a form of punishment for some crimes. Tough call, but I think it works. I believe there should be real consequences for crimes. Think about it, in our society we have seen the judicial system deteriorate right before our eyes. There has become a sort of tier system, the laws that the poor people are dealt with, the standard laws for the "middle class" and the lack of law or consequence for the rich. Think about politicians and prostitutes, millionaire athletes and murder, billionaires stealing. Do you think that Mr. Madoff who stole billions and robbed people of their life's savings would have acted differently knowing his hands may be cut off? Definitely not a sentence to be taken lightly. I believe we would have to come up with some pretty strict rules regarding the severity of the offense, but I think that if people were really afraid of the consequences they would realize they are not above the law and would think long and hard about committing the crime.

Argument #1:

Arguable issue: Whether mutilation is an appropriate form of punishment for some crimes.

P: Let the punishment fit the crime.

P: Fear is a great deterrent.

C: Mutilation as a form of punishment may be a viable alternative to reduce crime.