APELC Class Notes
Fourth period, we covered most of what your colleagues did yesterday. We had a fantastic discussion today about the morality of the Ibo tradition of (formerly) leaving twins born in their midst in the forest, perhaps to die from starvation or dehydration, maybe to be stung to death and ravaged by insects, perhaps torn apart by eaten by animals, because of their supernatural superstition.
While some (non-relativists) argued that, as ostensibly disinterested observers (say, researching the culture for an advanced degree), they would intervene for the protection of the twins, others (relativists) stated they’d not, suggesting it would be better not to interfere with such practices because they are culturally protected, that is, the ideas are inherently above scrutiny because a particular group of people believes them. Since we weren’t able to attend these in detail in class, I’ll throw out these two ideas here (from notes by Chris Heathwood) and ask that you think them over the remainder of our time together:
An argument for cultural relativism, Cultural Differences:
- Different societies have different beliefs about right and wrong.
- If different societies have different beliefs about right and wrong, then morality depends upon the beliefs of society.
- If morality depends upon the beliefs of society, then cultural relativism is true.
- Therefore, cultural relativism is true.
An argument against cultural relativism, the Reformer’s Dilemma:
- If cultural relativism is true, then anyone who advocates reform is mistaken.
- It is not the case that anyone who advocates reform is mistaken.
- Therefore, cultural relativism is not true.
How do you evaluate these ideas in the real-world context of recent incidents in Sudan, “Sudan outrage at trouser arrests”, and Pakistan, “Taliban Video Shows Teen Girl Beaten for ‘Adultery’”.
Have a good, thoughtful weekend, and return on Monday with the second draft of your cause and effect paper.