Cultural Relativism

`           A common objection to virtue ethics is that different cultures have different ideologies of what moral virtue is more significant than another. Some even have moral virtues that are conflicting among a specific culture. As an example of this, Greeks think that the virtue of pride, which is an appropriate behavior of winning honors, is the utmost important virtue. On the other hand, Christian monks think that humility is the most important virtue, which is humbleness in winning honors. Both of these virtues align in the same category but both cultures think to act differently. In Aristotle’s reading the diagram of virtue as a mean shows us that pride is the “correct virtue” and excessive humility is referred to as a vice of deficiency (384-387). Hursthorne discusses how cultural relativism could appear to be as a challenge.

            There’s a counter argument to be looked at for this objection. I recall in Socrates Metaethical Issues how it discussed that even though cultures are different; they still have a common underlying basis (14). It explained a sport analogy in how all sports are different yet they have common underlying principles (14). I think the same could be said with different cultures and their virtues. If a culture could testify why a certain virtue is sacred to them and proves that it shows high moral standards, then I don’t think it should be such a conflicting problem. If the reasoning behind their values makes sense, we should respect it. Even though all cultures are different, we all aim to act virtuously in our own practices. This could relate back to the sports analogy; different sports (cultures) have different rules (virtues), but in the end we all aim for the same goal to win under the same common basic principles (prosper and act virtuously within our own cultures).