A Mixing of Ideas

"We can understand the appeal of Cultural Relativism, then, even though theory has serious shortcomings." James Rachels stated this in his article "The Challenge of Cultural Relativism." Rachels makes many points about the shortcomings of Cultural Relativism, at the same time, he pulls out exactly what he sees beneficial from it. Cultural Relativism is based on the fact that cultures have different moral and ethic codes, according to their society. Therefore, it can be assumed wrong to judge these codes according to a different society's dangers. Deduced from this is the fact that there are no universal truths in ethics and morality. Rachels goes on to say that this ultimatum in unsound. He believes that there are some beliefs that have been proven wrong, some codes that are universal, and that some practices are inately wrong. I am of mixed opinion. I agree with some of Rachels's arguments, and believe that he is being too hard on others.
Rachels is from the University of Alabama, and therefore lives in the same culture as we do. In our culture, there are very few gray areas. In fact, we try very hard to define all gray areas. For instance, everyone has different ethnic backgrounds in America. Excepting a few traditions, we all live American lives. We all follow the laws and ethic codes of America. The differences in tradition may be wich holidays we celebrate, not whether or not we kill our children. Cultural Relativism does not fit in our culture. Cultural Relativism gives us no concrete right or wrong, in fact it says there is no such thing. In his own way, James Rachels is rejecting Cultural Relativism in the same manner as our society rejects the bareness of breasts. He is not keeping an open mind, he is attempting to fit this theory into our culture, a theory that does not belong.
This theory of Cultural Relativism, for most Americans, would be better on paper and remaining a theory. Very few people accept the fact that there is no right or wrong. However, the theory is valid. No two cultures are exactly the same, does that mean one is wrong? No, it just means that through different development and views the two cultures have learned to value different things in a different order of priority. Most differences in values between cultures, as Rachels pointed out, can be determined by the different conditions imposed upon the society. Cultural Relativism helps us to understand different cultures. By accepting the fact that there is no true right or wrong, it forces people to look for the reason for the difference. Upon finding the reasoning, the difference does not seem so extreme. I found this to be true in Things Fall Apart. At the beginning of the novel, I found Okonkwo to be very harsh to his father. I also saw him as cruel and selfish. However, I upon futher review of the novel, I found my accusations to be false. Okonkwo was just living by the standards of his society, and it was wrong to judge him by mine. By my standards, Okonkwo was a detestable figure. But when I thought about his culture, I understood him. Understood his actions and thoughts.
While I do not agree with Rachels rejection, I believe that he makes some arguments of merit. Cultural Relativism has the potential to ignore horrific facts. Anti-sematic nations should not go on killing sprees, and slavery wars should not be waged. This argument ties into another of Rachels, that there are some universal ethics that do exist, because without them a society would not survive. That being said, I believe it is only logical to believe that these univeral moral would hold true and stop any horrific acts form continuing. I still do not believe that this goes against Cultural Relativism. Cultural Relativism states only that there is not a universal code, that does not mean to say that some morals are not universal. I also highly doubt that Cultural Relativism is not about accepting, but about understanding.
Cultural Relativism states that moral codes can only be judged by the society and time they are found. I do not agree with the Middle East's practice of beating women. However, when considering a society based on honor and men having the higher position, understand where the beatings can be found acceptable. To my moral standards, these acts are horrific and I believe that something needs to be done about it. However, I do not believe that this is the goal of Cultural Relativism. I do not believe that the theory is attempting to promote beatings, or on our side, the uncovering of women. I believe that Cultural Relativism is attempting to create an understanding between cultures, one where we are not to quick to judge. We do not have to agree with the other cultures actions, nor do we have to sit around and do nothing, we just need to understand the reason behind it. By understanding the reasons better, we understand the culture better and are able to make better relations with that culture.