Home Discussion Forum Does cultural relativism is a concept opposed to a universal moral consciousness?

Does cultural relativism is a concept opposed to a universal moral consciousness?

Cultural relativism is an argument that individual beliefs are related to the culture in which they are made. Cultural relativism is often reduced to its component of moral relativism argument that it is not possible to determine an absolute or universal morality but that morality emerges from social customs and other human institutions. This relativism considered moral values as applicable only within the cultural boundaries.
Is there no moral values common to all peoples?


    and not this relativism
    render unto caesar…..
    Rom 13:1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
    Rom 13:2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
    Rom 13:3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:
    Rom 13:4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
    Joh 19:10 Then saith Pilate unto him, Speakest thou not unto me? knowest thou not that I have power to crucify thee, and have power to release thee?
    Joh 19:11 Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above: therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin.
    Joh 19:12 And from thenceforth Pilate sought to release him: but the Jews cried out, saying, If thou let this man go, thou art not Caesar’s friend: whosoever maketh himself a king speaketh against Caesar.

  2. there are a lot of common morals amongst all people’s and societies. opposition to murdering is one and another is lying. Simple things like these are necessary for a society to function. If it was ok to murder someone then it would be a savage society that would leave people in constant fear. If it were ok to lie then their would be no reason to believe anything anyone said and no one could rely on anyone else, do any sought of business or trading with someone and societies would cease to function, because it relies on people working together and trusting one another. So i guess you can say that these and other morals are common amongst all cultures.

  3. There aren’t any values common to all people, pick any social norm and think about it, there is at least on example of how it’s been adapted by society to become a common moral value…
    Murder- historically murder was accepted, think ancient Rome, infanticide, killing as a sport etc
    Incest- In ancient Egypt this was accepted and promoted. Many Pharaoh’s married and had children with their sisters

  4. The conscious morality of love is common to all people. Whether they live up to it or not are another question but all agree it is right in our nature. It has been reported that babies deprived of it die. Paradoxically most don’t know what it is or where it comes from but experience it at least once.

  5. Relativism and “universal morals” are contradictions. Relativists hold that there are no absolutes. A universal moral idea is an absolute.
    There is one universal moral value, ensconced in the United Nations Charter—-Jefferson’s idea of “unalienable rights”.
    This means that when someone does something to “alienate” you from your rights, he can only do with force. How is he to do it without force?
    You can write bad laws that alienate people from what nature and nature’s god gave them, but it takes the force of police or armies to carry out those laws.
    The non-aggression principle, also called the non-initiation of force, means that force can only be used to protect one’s self or family or property or nation from someone else who would try to use force to alienate you from your natural rights.
    If you use no force against another, you may do ABSOLUTELY ANYTHING YOU WANT TO. That is your right, unalienably. In the U.S. our Tenth Amendment says this.
    So the non-aggression principle is the only moral value common to all people, because to say it is any other thing is to expect people to act the way you want, when in reality they have the right to act any way they wish, so long as they do no harm. (It is also called the do-no-harm principle.)


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here