James Rachel's Argument Against Universal Values

Amongst the growing tensions between countries and protests striving for true equality for all, lies an issue of what our values are as a human race and from culture to culture. While everyone is a product of his or her culture, which causes different perceptions of actions, we are all human at our core and do not have one strict moral code, but some universal ethical standards at the root of our human nature. One proponent of this soft universalism was the philosopher James Rachels. He attempted to identify universal values, which included extending our species through care of the youth, a rule about lying and a rule about murder (Rosenstand, 142). Outside of these three values, people are free to express cultural beliefs as they please. Rachel’s values appear to reach common ground with multiple groups of people. For example, if we cannot trust someone not to kill us as we pass them on the street or lie to us on a constant basis, then …show more content…
Relativism claims that there are no universal values and every culture determines what is right and wrong based on their own set of values. However, this theory also claims that since each culture has its own set of values, we must be tolerant of all other values. The confirmation that there are definitively no universal morals cannot be verified because there is no way of knowing if we have looked enough for them. Thus, the theory must be false. Also, two major issues arise with toleration. The first is that relativism claims there are no universal morals and then says everyone must be tolerant. Thus, the theory refutes itself by suggesting toleration is universal. Finally, if all beliefs and values are all valid based on culture, then toleration could not exist because to tolerate something one must think that there is something better than it, which cannot be the case according to relativism (Rachels). Thus, relativism again proves

Show More

James Rachel's Argument Against Universal Values

Related Documents: James Rachel's Argument Against Universal Values

Concept Of Abortion