Beyond Cultural Relativism: an Ecological Model for Rhetorical Ethics

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Beyond Cultural Relativism: an Ecological Model for Rhetorical Ethics DOCUMENT RESUME ED 314 807 CS 507 036 AUTHOR Mackin, Jim TITLE Beyond Cultural Relativism: An Ecological Model for Rhetorical Ethics. PUB DATE Nov 89 NOTE 8p.; Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Speech Communication Association (75th, San Francisco, CA, November 18-21, 1989). PUB TYPE Speeches/Conference Papers (150)-- Viewpoints (120) -- Reports - Evaluative/Feasibility (142) EDRS PRICE MF01/PC01 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS Communication Research; Cultural Context; Ecclogy; *Ethics; *Models; Moral Values; Research Nee0s; *Rhetoric IDENTIFIERS Aristotle; Communication Theory; *Cultural Relativism ABSTRACT A model intended to overcome the cultural relativism of determining what is an ethical act draws an analogy to environmental studies. Beginning with the concepts of "telos" (final purpose) and "archai" (priority), the notion ofan ecosystem of ethics avoids limitation to a particular historical definitionof good. Since the telos of human life is the quest for the good,a communicative ecosystem's virtues are those which enable its members to seek the good. An ideal communicative system supports all parts equally, and the parts in turn support the system. The telosof the individual and of the system are interrelated; both must be taken into account in making ethical decisions. The practice of living ethically will include system building and transforming. How to help the present system become more like the ideal without making the system less viable is the central question. Combining the notionsof public and private into a systems relationship should increase understanding of the problem of morality, but also will raisenew inquiries. (Twenty-five notes are included.) (SG) ****************************.****************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best thatcan be made from the original document. k****t***************************************************************** BEYOND CULTURAL RELATIVISM AN ECOLOGICAL MODEL FORRHETORICAL ETHICS U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION by Jim Mackin Office of Eu icationai Research and Improvement "PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY Dept. of Communication CENTER (ERIC) This document has been reproduced as Tulane University received from the person or organization -3-7-161 Mackin originating it New Orleans, LA 70118 Points of view or opinions slated in this docu TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES ment do not necessarily represent official INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)." BITNET: COO 1 AKF@TCS V M OERI position or policy Aayonc who has taught communication ethics is morality.Movement toward universality is taken to be aware of the difficulty in achieving a consensus on how to moral growth, but why that should be is not explained. evaluate any given action.Surveys of the field of While her approach offers sonic valuable insights into the communication ethics would generally lead us to conclude problem, I don't believe she has escaped the chargc of that it is impossible to find even a common ground for cultural relativism. argument among most of the competing theories.' We In my own study of the problem, I have found usually offer a smorgasbord of competing theories and that a synthesis of Condit's concern with the public and hope that our students make a good choice. The problem Alasdair Machityress focus on the individual offersa is not just that we cannot come to agreementon what possible escape from cultural relativism.'What I would would be an ethical act of communication ina particular like to do in this paper is provide a model that balances situation but that we cannot even agreeon what would private and public interests and that can he used to constitute an ethical act of communication in general. evaluate our own cultural ethical standards.Borrowing The smorgasbord we offer varies, but it usually from environmental studies, I propose an ,xological model includes at least three varieties of ethical fare.For those that relates the Mos of any communicative or social who follow the contemporary version of the Humean system to the tclos of the individual. A cominunicative argument that facts and values are separated by an system is an ecosystem wheel it nurtures the individuals uncrossable gap, ethical argument is emotive argument and within it in their quest for the good.Admittedly, there arc so reducible to individual sentiments or tastes.Argument many different ways an ecosystem could develop and still over subjective taste is a waste of time; de_gustibus non nurture its individual members; no given system can serve est disputanduin, On the other hand, those who have as a transcendental model for communicative ecosystems. sought to avoid the Humean problem by basing ethics ina But the formal concept that a functioning ecosystem given society's claims upon the individualseem to be supports its constituent members and that its functioning subject to the charge of cultural relativism. The rhetoric members fill a niche in the ecosystem provides the basic of Hitler and Goebbels may not live up toour cultural principle that transcends cultures while avoidinga dogmatic standards; we can give "good reasons" not to accept their definition of what should constitute the good for the model of rhetoric in our society.But a nco-Nazi might individual or for ape culture in any given else.The reply that our cultural standards do not comprehend Nazi formal principle of the ecological ethic serves only to rhetoric and so simply do not apply. Toescape cultural provide a teleological ground for public moral argument relativism, the dogmatists of different persuasion; offer about what constitutes the good in a givencase of transcendent definitions of the good from wine', specific communication.In this sense, what I mu offering is a rules for action arc derived as in the Scholastic model. metacthical pound for rhetorical ethics--a means of With an a priori definition of good, the dogmatists evaluating how well we are crafting our public morality. foreclose argument at any level beyond casuistry. I will begin by examining some basic principles, Casuistic argument can only be condom(' within the given or archai, of an ethic based on the ecological model.'the tradition that accepts the dogmatic definition of the good. term archai in Greek suggests priority in time as well as Given the current alternatives, the question for priority in authority; thus the English language has derived communication ethics is. is it possible to avoid both archeology, and hierarchy from the term. The Greek subjectivism or relativism on one hand and dogmatismon term is appropriate because, in fact, the them), I propose the other?Celeste Condit has proposed that we can here is heavily indebted to the functional approach to escape this dilemma by accepting a view of public morals contained in Aristotelian ethics, especiallyas further morality as rhetorically constructed and affected by developed by Maellityre.So in one sense the proposed objective as well as subjective factors.' theory returns to a more archaic concept of ethics. I agree with Condit's overall project, but Iam not However, the principles proposed here seek to hanseend sure that she has solved the. problem. When she tries to the cultural relativism inherent in both Aristotle's and show Ns how rhetoric can improve public morality, MacIntyre's systems by anchoring the principles in the she offers us no means ,..:;I ,d ng what is to count as formal properites of the communicative ecosystem rather improvement. Of coin, agree that the than in a particular cultural tradition.Just as we must live inclusion of Blacks intl., lusticc was a public in a biological ecosystem, we must necessarily moral advance; but the f, ireement does not communicate in a communicative ecosystem.However provide a standard by which we can know thatwe have symbolism and communication may have arisen, they must improved. The problem seems to be that Condit, in have arisen out of a relationship between people.As correcting the errors of the "privatizers," hr. not offeredus communication developed, the nature of that relationship a means of evaluating the actual state of our public was altered folo.er; but the Net that communication must 2 take place within a system of relationships has not avoids Hume's prohlem of fact and value.Value is a changed. Each of us learned to communicate withina factual claim about a given person's functioning within a system of relationships, most often, a family.As in the community. To say that a person ought to perlOrin a 'biological ecosystem, the particular form or culture of the given duty is comparable to saying that a computer ought communicative ecosystem is contingent upon historical to run the necessary software programs. Only when the circumstances. The Aristotelian version of ethics is based individual element is removed from its functional in a particular subculture of Athenian aristocrats.As a relationships does an is-ought dilemma arise. result, while suggesting a profitable approach to ethics, Machityre's major contribution to the Aristotelian Aristotle's ethics lack the authority of true archai ina ethic is anchoring the Mos of the individual in that multicultural society.Nevertheless, Aristotle's concepts person's own narrative of his or her life.Much of modern represent the reflections of a keen mind observing a thought is incapable of visualizing the human life as a particular historical ecosystem and so can help informan unity.In Sartre's existentialism, the individual is separated ecological model. from the roles that person plays; in Go ffman's sociology, The archai of an ecological ethic consist ofa life is a series of unconnected episodes.But in reinterpretation of key concepts in ethical theory-- virtue MacIntyre's concept of selfhood, the unity of the. self (arete), the telos of an individual life, practice (praxis), and "resides in the unity of a narrative which links birth tolife the mean (meson vs. hoineorhesis)--in light of the formal to death as variative beginning to middle lo end.' properties of communicative ecosystems.
Recommended publications
  • In Order to Continue My Education With
    Contemporary Metaethics Part 1 My Personal Notes © James Gray 2009-2011 Originally published at http://ethicalrealism.wordpress.com/ 1 Table of Contents 1. What is “Morality?”................................................................................................................5 What does “morality” mean?..................................................................................................6 Moral and nonmoral standards...............................................................................................9 2. The Debate Over Moral Realism..........................................................................................11 What is Moral realism?........................................................................................................11 Is moral realism true?...........................................................................................................14 3. Meta-Ethical Theories...........................................................................................................16 Moral naturalism..................................................................................................................16 Moral intuitionism................................................................................................................17 Emotivism.............................................................................................................................17 Moral relativism...................................................................................................................18
    [Show full text]
  • Contemporary Ethics
    Social Psychology and Virtue Ethics Christian Miller Wake Forest University [email protected] The Journal of Ethics 7 (2003): 365-392 Several philosophers claim to have discovered a new and rather significant problem with virtue ethics.1 According to them, virtue ethics generates certain expectations about the behavior of human beings which are subject to empirical testing. But when the relevant experimental work is done in social psychology, the results fall remarkably short of meeting those expectations. So, these philosophers think, despite its recent success virtue ethics has far less to offer to contemporary ethical theory than might have been initially thought. In this paper, I hope to suggest some plausible ways in which virtue ethicists can resist arguments based on empirical work in social psychology.2 My plan is to proceed as follows. In the first three sections, an attempt will be made to reconstruct the line of reasoning being used against virtue ethics by 1 See for example Gilbert Harman, “Moral Philosophy Meets Social Psychology: Virtue Ethics and the Fundamental Attribution Error,” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 99 (1999), pp. 315-332 and “The Nonexistence of Character Traits,” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 100 (2000), pp. 223-226, John Doris, “Persons, Situations, and Virtue Ethics,” Noûs 32 (1998), pp. 504-530 and Lack of Character: Personality and Moral Behavior (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), and John Campbell, “Can Philosophical Accounts of Altruism Accommodate Experimental Data on Helping Behavior?” Australasian Journal of Philosophy 77 (1999), pp. 26-45. Other philosophers who seem to show some sympathy towards this objection include Simon Blackburn, Ruling Passions: A Theory of Practical Reasoning (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998), p.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 of Law, Virtue and Justice – an Introduction
    1 Of Law, Virtue and Justice – An Introduction AMALIA AMAYA AND HO HOCK LAI I. THE REVIVAL OF VIRTUE N THE LAST decades, there has been a blossoming of virtue-based approaches to a number of philosophical problems. Virtue theory has a I prominent place in both contemporary ethics and epistemology. A. Virtue Ethics Virtue ethics has its origins in Classical Greece and it was the dominant approach in western moral philosophy until the Enlightenment. During the nineteenth cen- tury and the first half of the twentieth century, virtue theory faded from the land- scape of moral philosophy, and the discussion on ethics centered around two traditions, namely, deontology and utilitarianism. Virtue ethics re-emerged in the late 1950s, with Elizabeth Anscombe’s important article ‘Modern Moral Philosophy’, and has established itself as a major approach in normative ethics.1 The revival of virtue ethics was motivated by an increasing dissatisfaction with deontology and utilitarianism. Proponents of virtue theories objected that these theories sidestepped or ignored a number of topics that any adequate moral phi- losophy should address, such as motives, moral character, moral education, the moral significance of friendship, family relations, and community bonds, ques- tions about what sort of person one should be, the role of emotions in our moral life, and a concern with happiness and flourishing.2 There is a wide variety of views that fall under the heading of virtue ethics, as critics have objected to differ- ent aspects of modern ethical theory and have developed a virtue-based approach 1 Anscombe (1958), reprinted in Crisp and Slote (1997).
    [Show full text]
  • NPTEL Moocs Multiple Choice Questions Assignment – Week II
    NPTEL MOOCs Multiple Choice Questions Assignment – Week II Answer the following multiple choice questions (1 marks each) 15x1 1. Which of the following statement is correct? a) Culture is a way of life which is created by human beings and necessarily includes dimensions of both material or objective and symbolic or subjective b) Culture is a way of life shared by certain groups of people within certain value system and norms and does not necessarily include material or objective dimension c) Culture is a way of defining human body through its physical features d) None of the above 2. The study of the relationships and interactions among humans, their biology, their cultures, and their physical environments is known as? a) Ecology b) Human ecology c) Deep ecology d) All of the above 3. The study of the biological aspect of the human-environment relationship is known as? a) Human biological ecology b) Cultural ecology c) Human ecology d) All of the above 4. Who among the following developed the concept of cultural ecology? a) Julian Steward b) Herbert Spencer c) Charles Darwin d) Roy Rappaport 5. Which of the following is not part of economic system? a) Production (produce the things they need) b) Exchange (exchange things with each other and people of other societies c) Consumption (consume things) d) Distribution (distribute things) 6. In order to survive human beings collectively produce the means of subsistence and enhance their social being with the use of available technology is known as a) Means of production b) Reproduction c) Mode of production d) All of the above 7.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Unit 5 Ethics in Contemporary Philosophy
    UNIT 5 ETHICS IN CONTEMPORARY PHILOSOPHY Contents 5.0. Objectives 5.1. Introduction 5.2. Definition 5.3. Normative Ethics: A New Look 5.4. Meta-ethics or Second Order Ethics 5.5. Virtue Ethics: The Aristotelian Revival 5.6. Practical Ethics: Forgotten Past Unearthed 5.7. Let Us Sum Up 5.8. Key Words 5.9. Further Readings and References 5.10. Answers to Check Your Progress 5.0. OBJECTIVES An overview of history of western ethics (which is a branch of philosophy), called “Moral Philosophy” as well, gives us an idea that there are at least five important epochs in the philosophical enterprise regarding moral matters. “Contemporary Western Ethics” is the fifth epoch; the objective of this paper is: • to bring out the characteristic features of contemporary ethics 5.1. INTRODUCTION First, there is early and rich Greek Ethics marked by Pre- Socratic, Socratic, Platonic, Aristotelian and Sophistic original thinking and writings. Furthered by some equally influential writings of some Hellenistic and Roman ethicists, the Cynic and the Cyrenaics and the Stoics in the main. And then after Epicurus’ Cyrenaicism, Plotinus was responsible for what we now call, “Neo-Platonism.” Contemporary ethics owes much to these early and rich ethical reflections, about which we shall come to know later on in the discussion. Nothings less do we owe to the Medical Moral philosophy, especially to the ethical thinking and writings of some remarkably eloquent Christian ethicists like Augustine, Aquinas, Duns Scotus and William of Ockham. This paved way to what we may call, the third epoch, the Early Modern ethical epoch, growing particularly during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries influenced by religious Reformation, and the scientific revolution of Copernicus and Galileo, Francis Bacon, Erasmus, Luther and Calvin, However the real modern turn came with the radical writings of Thomas Hobbes (1588 – 1679) and the Cambridge Platonists like, Cudworth, Cumberland, Malebranche.
    [Show full text]
  • Radical Diversity in a Global Context -Theoretical Reflections on International Education
    a OCCMICPT at Stilt ED 032 568 cc 004 376 By-Frelick. John Paul Radical Diversity in a 'Global Context: Theoretical Reflections on International EduCation-- American Personnel and Guidance Association. Washington. D.C. Pub Date Jan 69 Note-19p.: Paper prepared for the American Personnel and Guidance Association Convention. Las Vegas. Nevada. March 30 -April 3. 1969. EDRS Price ME 3025 HC -S1.05 Descriptors -*College Role. Cultural Factors. Cultural Interrelationships. Cultural Pluralism. Educational Philosophy. Ethnic Groups. Foreign Students. Social Change. Social Values The author discusses the current role of the university and its relationship to the whole of society in a global context. To the student personnel worker a particular problem is posed; how to encourage cultural contact. particularly with foreign and minority students while at the same time encouraging the conformity necessary for effective functioning. both in society and in the university. In our pluralistic society. we should recognize diversity as shared opportunity but in reality we partition society off into the two culture streams--the humanist and the scientific. Cultural pluralism tends to become cultural imperialism whereby the dominant culture seeks to absorb the subsidiary one to provide commonality. The role of the university is such that it can become more relevant to the world in which it functions by seeking cutural encounters beyond itself rather than by merely defending the majority culture and its ideological rationale. (CJ) 11 U.S DEPARTMENT Of HEALTH, EDUCATION i WELFARE OFFICE OF EDUCATION THIS DOCUMENT HAS KEN REPRODUCED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED FROM THE CO PERSON 01 ORGANIZATION ORIGINATING IT.POINTS OF VIEW OR OPINIONS %CO STATED DO NOT NECESSARILY REPRESENT OFFICIAL OFFICE OF EDUCATION 111 POSITION OR POLICY.
    [Show full text]
  • The Metaethics of Multiculturalism Joseph Thompson University of Alaska Faribanks, [email protected]
    Comparative Civilizations Review Volume 53 Article 4 Number 53 Fall 2005 10-1-2005 Cultural Relativism or Covert Universalism? The Metaethics of Multiculturalism Joseph Thompson University of Alaska Faribanks, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/ccr Recommended Citation Thompson, Joseph (2005) "Cultural Relativism or Covert Universalism? The eM taethics of Multiculturalism," Comparative Civilizations Review: Vol. 53 : No. 53 , Article 4. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/ccr/vol53/iss53/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the All Journals at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Comparative Civilizations Review by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Thompson: Cultural Relativism or Covert Universalism? The Metaethics of Mul 34 Comparative Civilizations Review CULTURAL RELATIVISM OR COVERT UNIVERSALISM? THE METAETHICS OF MULTICULTURALISM JOSEPH THOMPSON PHILOSOPHY & HUMANITIES, UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA FAIRBANKS [email protected] If the power of thought is universal among mankind, so like- wise is the possession of reason, making us rational crea- tures. It follows, therefore, that this reason speaks no less universally to us all with its 'thou shalt' or 'thou shalt not.' So then there is a world-law; which in turn means that we are all fellow-citizens and share a common citizenship, and that the world is a single city. —Marcus Aurelius Meditations 4.4 (167 CE)1 Claims to moral universality are basic to conceptions of human rights, the concept of war crimes and crimes against humanity, and our understanding of international law and justice.
    [Show full text]
  • Contemporary Ethical Theories and Jurisprudence George Nakhnikian
    Notre Dame Law School NDLScholarship Natural Law Forum 1-1-1957 Contemporary Ethical Theories and Jurisprudence George Nakhnikian Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/nd_naturallaw_forum Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Nakhnikian, George, "Contemporary Ethical Theories and Jurisprudence" (1957). Natural Law Forum. Paper 17. http://scholarship.law.nd.edu/nd_naturallaw_forum/17 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by NDLScholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Natural Law Forum by an authorized administrator of NDLScholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CONTEMPORARY ETHICAL THEORIES AND JURISPRUDENCE George Nakhnikian FOUR TYPES of ethical theory have been the ones most heatedly debated among analytic philosophers since the appearance in 1903 of G. E. Moore's Principia Ethica. Each type has certain consequences for jurisprudence. This essay describes the essential features of the theories and points out some of the readily discernible consequences. For the sake of clarity, I shall explain how I am using the terms 'juris- prudence' and 'ethical theory' and make some remarks concerning the relevance of ethics for jurisprudence. I have adopted Julius Stone's definition of 'jurisprudence' and his three- fold division of jurisprudence into analytical, ethical, and sociological. "Juris- prudence," writes Stone, "is the examination of law in the light of other disciplines than the law." ' The following three main questions may be asked concerning the
    [Show full text]
  • Ethics Content
    Ethics Content I Introduction to Ethics Unit-1 Nature and Scope of Ethics Unit-2 Importance and Challenges of Ethics Unit-3 Ethics in the History of Indian Philosophy Unit-4 Ethics in the History of Western Philosophy II Ethical Foundations Unit-1 Human Values Unit-2 Human Virtues Unit-3 Human Rights Unit-4 Human Duties III Applied Ethics Unit-1 International Ethics Unit-2 Bioethics Unit-3 Environmental Ethics Unit-4 Media Ethics IV Current Ethical Debates Unit-1 Natural Moral Law Unit-2 Deontology and Moral Responsibility Unit-3 Discourse Ethics Unit-4 Social Institutions UNIT 1 NATURE AND SCOPE OF ETHICS Nature and Scope of Ethics Contents 1.0 Objectives 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Moral Intuitionism 1.3 Human Person in Search of Himself/Herself 1.4 Love and the Moral Precepts 1.5 The Dynamics of Morality 1.6 The Constant and the Variable in Morality 1.7 Let Us Sum Up 1.8 Key Words 1.9 Further Readings and References 1.0 OBJECTIVES This unit aims at introducing the students to the philosophical need for Ethics starting from a brief discussion of Moral law and how the human person in his or her process of growth intuits the ethical principles. Discussions pertaining to the dynamics of morality is undertaken to show how on the one hand new situations call for new responses from moral point of view and on the other hand certain fundamentals of ethics remain the same in so far as there is something of a common human nature adequately understood.
    [Show full text]
  • Rawls and the Kantian Ethos*
    Polity . Volume 39, Number 1 . January 2007 r 2007 Northeastern Political Science Association 0032-3497/07 $30.00 www.palgrave-journals.com/polity Rawls and the Kantian Ethos* Nicholas Tampio Hamilton College John Rawls had a life-long interest in Kant. To provide a new perspective on Rawls’s political thinking, to illuminate Kant’s legacy for political theory, and to contribute to current debates about the Enlightenment, I track how Rawls interprets and transforms Kant’s legacy. In this essay, I show how Rawls reconceptualizes four key Kantian activities: the identification of the problem, the engagement with common sense, the construction of principles, and the authentication of principles. I defend Rawls from the charge—made by Allan Bloom, Michael Sandel, and Allen Wood, among others—that Rawls fundamentally misunderstands or misuses Kant. The basis of my defense is that Rawls considers a critical intellectual sensibility (or ethos), rather than a specific doctrine (e.g., the categorical imperative), as the most valuable component of Kant’s legacy. Polity (2007) 39, 79–102. doi:10.1057/palgrave.polity.2300044 Keywords Rawls; Kant; Enlightenment; ethos Nicholas Tampio teaches political theory at Hamilton College. He researches the legacy of the Enlightenment in contemporary political theory. He can be reached at [email protected]. Introduction John Rawls, it is well known, was a life-long student of Kant.1 One of the most famous and controversial sections of A Theory of Justice (1971) is entitled, ‘‘The *This essay grew out of seminars on Kant and Rawls at Johns Hopkins University with William E.
    [Show full text]
  • 57 G. E. Moore and Theory of Moral/Right Action in Ethics of Social
    Ethics & Bioethics (in Central Europe), 2017, 7 (1–2), 57–65 DOI:10.1515/ebce-2017-0002 G. E. Moore and theory of moral/right action in ethics of social consequences Vasil Gluchman Abstract G. E. Moore’s critical analysis of right action in utilitarian ethics and his consequentialist concept of right action is a starting point for a theory of moral/right action in ethics of social consequences. The terms right and wrong have different meanings in these theories. The author explores different aspects of right and wrong actions in ethics of social consequences and compares them with Moore’s ideas. He positively evaluates Moore’s contributions to the development his theory of moral/right action. Keywords: G. E. Moore, right, wrong, ethics of social consequences Introduction When formulating the theory of moral/right action in ethics of social consequences,1 I took inspiration from G. E. Moore’s critical analysis of right action in utilitarian ethics and his consequentialist concept of right action (Moore, 2000; 2005), which I adopted as the starting point of my reasoning (Gluchman, 2000, pp. 9–23; 2001, pp. 633–634). I follow the view of action similar to that of Moore, which means he evaluates the actions of a moral agent on the basis of their consequences. However, unlike Moore, I form in ethics of social consequences a broader scope of evaluative judgements,2 and what is also broader is the value structure of ethics of social consequences, as among the fundamental values there are humanity, human dignity, the moral right of man to life, its development and cultivation, as well as the values of justice, responsibility, tolerance and obligation (Gluchman, 2003; 2009, pp.
    [Show full text]
  • The Decline of Western Civilization: How Value Relativism
    THE DECLINE OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION: HOW VALUE RELATIVISM CAUSED THE EROSION OF WESTERN PHILOSOPHICAL ACTIVITY ;'\ND CULTURAL IDENTITY A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the College of Business and Public Affairs Morehead State University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Public Administration by Michael D. Alley April 18, 2010 m ~u ;J-IESFS I 91. 7 A43S-oL Accepted by the facul ty of the College of Business and Public Affairs, Morehead State University, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Public Administration degree. Master's Committee:'------,J¥fa , Chair ~W-~J4' J ' Date THE DECLINE OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION: HOW VALUE RELATIVISM I CAUSED THE EROSION OF WESTERN PHILOSOPHICAL ACTIVITY ~D CULTURAL IDENTITY Michael D. Alley, MPA Morehead State University, 2010 4 Director of Thesis: -f-,,4_0tf-..,~""'.3--,,.-~:!a<!:~,4,J~..i7~.,..¥::::::::,:::~---------"' -M-m-~! Modem philosophers such as Machiavelli, Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, 1 Nietzsche, and Heidegger fundamentally transformed Western thought, which prepared the way for the contemporary embrace of value relativism. Unlike the classical philosophers of the past, such as Plato and Aristotle, who believed in objective moral truth and sought to answer the fundamental questions of mankind, many contemporary thinkers have dismissed objective moral truth and have embraced the idea that those things that cannot be proven empirically hold no validity whatsoever because they are merely subjective value judgments, relative to an individual's opinions or feelings, culture, or history. The rejection of the posfibility ' of objective moral truth has undermined the core principles that are the· very foundation of Western culture.
    [Show full text]