Religion and Relativism

Relativism is a methodological paradigm that underpins numerous ethical theories in interpreting the nature of morality. It is represented through moral conceptions that are exceedingly relative, volatile, and conditional. Moral principles, the notions of good and evil, differ for people, social groups, and individuals, and they are linked to people's interests, beliefs, and dispositions in some way, as well as being constrained in their meaning by place and time. The purpose of this paper is to conduct a critical analysis of an article on the subject.  Diane F. Orentlicher conducted her own analysis of the relationship between relativism and religion, explained both what aspects they are intertwined with and how they affect the issue of human rights. The author singled out four main strategies for relativistic change and examined the theories of philosophers who adhered to those theories. Appealing to the first strategy, the author refered to Michael Ignatieff that has developed his own theories of subtle universalism and pragmatic fundamentalism (Orentlicher, 2001). The author also considered the issue of justice and the one that takes decisions on the protection of human rights.

Additionally, the author defined the second strategy, procedural accommodation, as a crisis of legitimacy. The main message is that this strategy is a relativistic challenge and, accordingly, that research on this topic is confirmed by the fact that social values build society itself and respect for human rights. Therefore, in this case everything is connected. Transnational collaboration was referred to the category of strategies that are force for power. Such a strategy implies a solid and successful intercultural communication, which brings positive results in the form of universal peace agreements and amicable agreements. Engaging religion was also related to the theories of Ignatieff; however, it concerned the issue of religion and the protection of human rights.

Analysis

First of all, it is worth noting that convincing sounds an explanation of the strategies of relativistic change. It becomes clear that religions all over the world bear their message to every people and every person, and also respect human rights. One can understand that there are various beliefs that religious teaching is the basis for building public and private life. It has always been difficult to implement it in history, as there are many different religions and non-religious worldviews, because the weakening of religious feelings in society can lead to discontent with too strict religious rules. The fact is that any modern person is especially sensitive to the imposition of any worldview and way of life. The main value in life is freedom, even if there is a substitution of this concept and abuse of it. The value of freedom is not indifferent to religion. Therefore, the only way to spread the religious outlook in society is not the force of coercion, but the power of attraction.

Due to this article, any reader will be able to understand how he or she sees this world, and how people of other cultures living in other countries do it. At the same time, for a person not particularly indicated in various political and philosophical terms, he will not be able to fully understand the meaning of the author’s explanations. Especially, it concerns the consideration of the issue of universalism of Ignatieff. However, it can be concluded that universal values do not exist at all, and that human rights are Western values, which implies cultural relativism. Indeed, the ideas of cultural relativism are especially popular in the former colonial countries, who perceived universal human rights as a new form of imperialism from the West. Nevertheless, relativism determines the nature of man and his or her rights. It can be concluded that cultural relativism manifested itself vividly in the “Asian value” system, characterized by the idea of the relativity of human rights, the recognition of the family as the core of society, the increased importance of economic, social and cultural factors, the interrelationship between rights and obligations, and a strong emphasis on national sovereignty.

Weak Part

As for the weak or incomprehensible sides of the article, it is probably a strategy of moral anthropology. On the one hand, the author clearly explains that each person has his own interests and if the interests of one person differ from the interests of the other, this does not mean that one of them is uncultured or not humane. Nevertheless, the given arguments and the theories of Ignatieff about religion are not the only ones that concern this issue. However, in addition to Ignatieff, there are many opinions about moral anthropology and social philosophy in general. For example, there are a lot of Kant’s researches on this subject. However, unlike Ignatieff, this philosopher always made the main emphasis on the sensation of a person who is self-centered (Kleingeld, 1991).

The entire philosophical system of Kant implies the cognition and establishment of the highest principle of morality. Kant argued that the motive, depending on the sensory basis, cannot be a universal law, not only for other people, but also for oneself. Additionally, the philosopher explained this by the fact that the feelings, pleasures and displeases of each person are impermanent and change over time, and morality itself forms a kind of system in the subconscious of a person. Nevertheless, Kant, in contrast to Ignatieff, did not take into account the issue of human culture. Thus, it can be concluded that, according to Kant, recognizing the inherent sacred moral law, people can be guided by a practical mind and do things that do not contradict the inner code of man. Thus, it is the involvement of the strategy of moral anthropology that is one-sided and does not consider the alternative views of other philosophers.

Personally, I was attracted by the strategy of transnational collaboration. It affects many different aspects of life, such as social equality, gender equality, feminist movement and opposition to it, and so forth. Cultural relativism has a direct bearing on all these issues. Undoubtedly, the difference in the material culture of different countries is obvious and expressed in something: architecture or people’s clothing, for example. Also, there are significant differences in values, customs, or laws, for example. Nevertheless, the tendency to assess the customs, norms and values of other cultures, from the perspective of perceiving one's own culture as central, can be considered ethnocentrism. It is functionally expedient; however, it does not in any way help to unite people in society. Also, ethnocentrism can acquire destructive forms, for example, xenophobia or chauvinism. In my opinion, there is a very fine line between correctness and acceptance, as well as condemnation and open chauvinism. In addition, ethnocentrism also hampers the scientific study of the cultures of the world.

Thus, it can be concluded that cultural relativism is a certain conviction that the evaluation of a particular element of culture is possible only within the culture with which he or she occurs. However, there is one more restriction: this is subjectivity of judgment. Each person evaluates people and events in his own way and, accordingly, the culture of any country or ethnical group can be objectively described, for example, saying that its representatives behave in a certain way, believe in a certain god and live according to certain family values. It is possible to perceive such fact both positively and negatively.

Verdict

This article is worth reading to people that are very interested in philosophical concepts and tend to reflect on deep things. Certainly, philosophy is in touch with many questions of life. It always tries to answer the most important questions of the universe and sociology, as well as of cultural studies and history. To such readers this article can help to form a broad view of the issues of relativism and religion, and their mutual relations. At the same time, if a reader is not ready to perceive the subjective thoughts and conclusions of the author of the article, they may not be to him or her to taste and cause controversial emotions. Potential readers have their own notion of the existence of absolute truth or the acceptance of its eternal relativity. Such people would be given such an opportunity to think independently in the direction of relativism and culturology, and draw conclusions. Some of them would produce their new ideas, and some ones would take an idea in ready-made form, without developing anything independently. Thinking is an insecure thing. Additionally, those potential readers that are interested in religion in particular would be able to consider an alternative opinion on the explanations of what is happening in the world, in terms of theology.

References

Kleingeld, Pauline. (1991). Kant, History, and the Idea of Moral Development. The History of Philosophy Quarterly, v. 16, pp. 59-80.

Orentlicher, Diane F. (2001). Relativism and Religion. Web. Retrieved from http://www.nyu.edu/classes/gmoran/ORENTLICHER.pdf. Accessed on 6 December, 2017.