Every society has its own unique cultures in which people will have different ideas of moral codes. The diversity of these cultures cannot be said to be correct or incorrect. Every society has independent standards of ethic within their society and these standards are culture-bound. Cultural Relativism has a perception in which rightness or wrongness of an action depends entirely within the bounds of the culture. This theory opposes the belief in the objectivity of moral truth. Moreover, there is no universal truth in ethics, only various cultural codes instead. On the other point of view, it has been suggested that the world should derive an objective truth in every action. This essay will argue against the existence of objective truth in …show more content…
It is an over-optimistic argument as cultural relativism has a more logical way of reasoning, for at least two reasons. First, it reminds us that objective truth does not have a plausible standard in every culture that is peculiar to the society. Furthermore, it shows that every value must be less universal as every society has its own moral code. For example, eating the flesh of our parents is dreadful to a normal person. However, for the Callatian (Blanco, 2013), it is a sign of respect as the person’s spirit will dwell within them. Therefore, different cultures with result in different moral codes. In that case, people should see matters from many aspects instead of having a general truth as the standard. A second reason why cultural relativism has a more logical way of reasoning is because it teaches us to keep in an open mind. This can be seen from the fact that people should respect and tolerate other’s culture since there is no universal truth that holds for all people. Taken together, these two arguments demonstrate the logical way reasoning of cultural relativism and highlight the advantage of the cultural relativism