Relativism and Morality

SOC 120

11 May 2013

Relativism and Morality
From the beginning of time people have debated over what is considered to be right, and what is considered to be wrong. In the article “Some Moral Minima” Lenn Goodman states and gives examples of things he believes are inherently wrong, and defines just how these examples, in his opinion, are morally wrong. From the perspective of a singular person, it would be far easier to assimilate opinions into facts with quotes and examples that are designed to support the opinions and back them up as if they were facts. However, for each person, the idea of morally right, morally wrong, and morally ambiguous will vary and differ wildly, and each will have a different opinion on the matter. Even one society versus another will find different perspectives on right and wrong. While most of society will agree that there are just certain things that are absolutely wrong, there will always be others that find no moral debasement toward those same things.
I do not believe that Lenn Goodman is absolutely correct in his summation of all the topics he presented as being morally wrong. Where it is perceived among civilized society that the majority of acts he discussed are actions to be abhorred, there are some of the acts that are widely entrenched in tradition and should be scrutinized with an unbiased opinion in regards to such. The societies and cultures that choose to practice them have a perceived compelling reason to consider acts as morally correct within their respective cultures, and continue to practice them because of that belief. To me it seems that Lenn Goodman has a very strict idea of what is right and what is wrong, and applies his opinion of right and wrong based on a western cultural viewpoint. Western cultures view many older traditions of ancient cultures with the opinions that societal majorities dictate.

In the instance of female genital mutilation, the cultures that practice the...