Cultural diversity refers to religious, sexual, racial, and other forms of social difference. A moral dilemma is a situation in which one must make a decision between two or more options such that the options involve seemingly ethical and/or unethical conduct.
What was the situation? What did the dilemma involve?
What would a subjective moral relativist say is the right approach to the dilemma? Why would that kind of relativist say that?
What would a cultural relativist say is the right approach to the dilemma? Why would that kind of relativist say that? Is that approach correct?
What did you or the person confronting the dilemma decide to do? What moral justification did you or they give? Is that approach morally correct?
Was there an objective moral truth (the objectively right thing to do) in this situation? Why or why not?
Full Answer Section
Subjective Moral Relativism
A subjective moral relativist would argue that there is no objectively right or wrong answer to this dilemma. They would believe that morality is entirely subjective and depends on the individual's personal beliefs and values. In this case, a subjective moral relativist might say that Anya should make the decision that feels right to her, regardless of the consequences.
Cultural Relativism
A cultural relativist would argue that morality is relative to a specific culture or society. They would suggest that since FGM is a cultural tradition in Anya's community, it is morally acceptable within that context. However, a cultural relativist might also acknowledge that individuals within a culture may have differing moral beliefs and may choose to challenge cultural norms.
Is Cultural Relativism Correct?
While cultural relativism can be helpful in understanding and respecting different cultural perspectives, it does not necessarily provide a morally correct answer to every dilemma. In the case of FGM, many argue that the practice is harmful to women's health and violates their human rights, regardless of cultural traditions.
Anya's Decision and Moral Justification
Anya might decide to defy tradition and refuse to undergo FGM, citing her belief in bodily autonomy and the potential health risks of the procedure. Her moral justification could be based on principles of individual rights and harm reduction.
Is This Approach Morally Correct?
Whether Anya's decision is morally correct is a complex question that depends on one's moral framework. Many would argue that her decision is morally justified, as it prioritizes her individual well-being and human rights over cultural tradition. However, others might argue that she has a duty to uphold her cultural heritage and avoid causing harm to her family or community.
Objective Moral Truth
The existence of an objective moral truth in this situation is a matter of philosophical debate. Some believe that there are universal moral principles that apply to all people, regardless of cultural context. Others argue that morality is entirely subjective and depends on individual or cultural beliefs.
In the case of FGM, many argue that the practice is inherently harmful and violates human rights, suggesting that there is an objective moral truth in this situation. However, others may disagree, arguing that cultural traditions should be respected, even if they involve practices that are considered harmful in other cultures.
Sample Answer
Situation:
Imagine a young woman, Anya, from a traditional African culture where female genital mutilation (FGM) is a deeply ingrained cultural practice. Anya is approaching the age where she is expected to undergo FGM, but she has serious concerns about the procedure's health risks and its violation of her bodily autonomy.
The Dilemma:
Anya faces a difficult choice:
- Conform to tradition: Undergo FGM to please her family and community, even though she believes it is harmful.
- Defy tradition: Refuse to undergo FGM, risking social ostracization, family conflict, and potential violence.