Ethical objectivism and Kantian Ethics ar arguments to ethical relativism - Essay Example

Ethical Objectivism and Kantian Ethics The nature of cultural understanding is strongly rooted in notions of ethics. Prominent researchers and anthropologists have advanced notions regarding ethnocentrism wherein morality must be judged within the specific cultural context. These notions of ethical relativism have received significant criticism from a variety of perspectives and ethical theorists. One considers one of the most prominent example the cultural actions of the Nazi’s in carrying out the Holocaust in World War II; few would condone such an action based on cultural relativism.

Implementing Kantian ethics, this essay argues against ethical relativism. Even in the contemporary world there are a strong amount of arguments in favor of ethical relativism. Some of the most prominent such arguments are advanced by anthropologists whose job it is to go into a region and develop ethnographical research regarding a culture. While these perspectives are at times convincing specifically about more grey areas issues, on a large-scale it’s clear that they are shortsighted. When extended to universal aspects of all cultures, adopting an approach of ethical relativism could potentially be calamitous for humanity.

In these regards, it is possible that one cultural paradigm conflicts with the subsistence of another culture. It follows that when one’s cultural paradigm infringes on the rights and existence of another cultural paradigm that there needs to be a means of further establishing ethical responsibility. A great number of ethical theories exist in contradistinction to the ethical relativist model, with the Kantian approach to ethics the most convincing. Kant argues that, “All moral statements should be general laws, which apply to everyone under and circumstances” (“Kant”).

This notion, referred to as the categorical imperative, is the understanding that an ethical action must be that can be applied in a universal way; as such, this precludes many activities that would otherwise be condoned under an ethical relativist perspective. Another prominent notion within Kantian ethics is the notion of moral duty. Moral duty argues that an individual has the duty to obey innate moral laws (“Kant’s Moral Philosophy”). The articulation of ethical responsibility as rooted in innate moral laws characteristic of all humanity is antithetical to moral relativism.

Rather ethics as functioning subjectively, they are innate and universal to all cultures. Ultimately, adopting this Kantian is model is superior to the relativist approach as the former creates a more functional global environment. In conclusion, this essay has examined notions of ethical relativism. The essay has demonstrated that while considerable support exists for the relativist approach, it is ultimately shortsighted as it creates a world climate wherein a culture could adopt a paradigm that threatens another culture’s existence.

Conversely, Kantian ethics, as grounded in the categorical imperative, presents an ethical approach based in innate moral responsibility and the universal applicability of ethical law. Ultimately, it’s demonstrated that the Kantian ethical approach is more functional for global accord than the ethical relativist approach. References"Kant and the Categorical Imperative." Kant. N.p., 2008. Web. 4 Dec 2011. ."Kants Moral Philosophy." . N.p., 2008. Web. 4 Dec 2011. .