PHIL 201STUDY GUIDE: LESSON 21The Challenge to Traditional Ethics: Cultural Relativism and EmotivismLesson Overview:Before looking at the 3 major ethical theories, we should first explore and critique 2 challenges to traditional morality. The first of these is cultural relativism, which says that moral rules or norms vary from society to society. Therefore, whether a particular act is right or wrong depends on the society to which we are applying the rule. The second challenge is emotivism, which argues that moral claims don’t have any cognitive meaning at all. Instead, they are merely expressions of our feelings. We will examine both of these challenges, showing that they have severe problems of their own and should be rejected.Tasks:Read Chapters 2 and 3 of Ethics: Approaching Moral Decisions, “Cultural Relativism” and “Emotivist Ethics.” As you do, consider the following questions and points:- Two implications of the Sumner quote.1. Moral practices vary with and depend on human needs and social conditions.2. Moral attitudes and practices are basically non cognitive responses rather than the product of rational direction. (pg. 19)- The distinction between descriptive and normative statements.Descriptive - what people ought to doNormative - what people actually do(pg. 19)- Problems with the diversity thesis.Fails to distinguish diversity in particular moral practices from diversity in the principles implicit in such concerns. (pg. 20)Overstates both the variety and the extent of ethical relativity. (pg. 21)- Problems with the dependency thesis.Dependency thesis- morality is not a matter of independent rational judgement but is causally dependent on cultural context (the truth or falsity og the moral beliefs does not really arise)Problem: beliefs in general are culturally determined, so is belief in the dependency thesis, it too is caused by influences we cannot control. Whether and to what extent we are able to transcend diverse environmental influences on our beliefs by means of critical and imaginative thinking (irrelevant to the question of truth) (pg 21-22)- Problems with ethnocentrism.Ethocentrism- our supposed intolerence is now the issue, while cultural relativism has become the front supporting toleration of ethical differencesProblems: - I may well defend universal moral norms without defending my own culture-the relativist cannot consistently reject all intolerence. In tolerating other moralities then his own, he must tolerate their intolerance. (pg 23)- Holmes’s normative view.Christians should be ansious to reject intolerance, or selective in what is tolerated where cultures differ. Western believers have roots in two moral traditions: an earthly cultural relm and a heavenly. Biblical perspective teaches to tolerate cultural differences, but teaches limitations to ethical tolerance. (pg 23-24)PHIL 201- The distinction between emotivism and ethical subjectivism.Emotivism: (noncognative view)-the view that moral language simply expresses and perhaps arouses emotion, so that nothing we say in moral terms is either true or false about anything (pg. 26) expresses or vents feelingEthical subjectivism: (cognative view)- emotivists conclude that ethical intuitions really express subjective feelings rather than evidencing a direct knowledge of moral properties or ethical truths. (pg. 28) describes feelings- Explain the 2 philosophical movements that led to emotivism.1. A reaction against an attempt to settle moral disputes by appealing to a supposedly universal ethical intuition. (G.E. Moore - Bloomsbury Circle)2. logical positivism - insistence that only 2 kinds of cognitive language are possible: analytic and factual statements that can be empirically tests. (pg. 28)- Stevenson’s theory of the relation between facts and attitudes as a defense for emotivism.Distinguished some factual beliefs involved in moral arguments from the emotive attitudes. (pg. 29)--facts- can be decribed in empircal language--attitudes find expression in emotive language- Holmes’s 3 criticisms of emotivism.--if emotivism implies subjectivism then moral judgments are at least true or false statements about subjective attitudes--empirical language is interpretive and descriptive--are they altogether noncognitive, or do attitudes and emotional expressions say something bout the objective situations?Terms:Make sure you fully understand the following terms and concepts:- Cultural RelativismThe view that moral beliefs and practices vary with and depend on the human needs and socialconditions of particular cultures, so that no moralbeliefs can be universally true. (pg. 19)- Diversity ThesisMoral practices and beliefs do in fact vary from culture to culture and at different times in history and none are universal. (pg. 19)- Dependency ThesisThat morality is not a matter of independent rational judgment but is causally dependent on cultural context. (pg. 21)- EthnocentrismAd hominem argument - accusing advocates of universal, normative moral beliefs of wearing cultural blinders. Our own culture has so - Ethical SubjectivismTakes our normative ethical statements to be veiled statements about inner feelings. (pg. 27)- Ethical Intuitionism(G.E. Moore) Takes our normative ethical statements to be veiled statements about inner feelings. (pg. 27)- Logical PositivismInsistence that only 2 kinds of cognitive languageare possible: analytic statements (definitions & tautologies) and factual statements that can be empirically tested. (pg. 28)- CognitiveEthical subjectivism (a cognitive view)(pg. 31)- Non-CognitiveEmotivismPHIL 201conditioned us to think we are morally superior and our more rational approach is best. (pg. 23)- EmotivismAd hominem argument - accusing advocates of universal, normative moral beliefs of wearing cultural blinders. Our own culture has so conditioned us to think we are morally superior and our more rational approach is best. (pg. 23)(pg.