Anthropology Essay Sample
Chapter Four
My favorite theory of normative ethics in chapter four is utilitarianism. In this chapter, Newman provides the definition of utilitarianism whereby certain aspects of the theory are eluded. For instance, the author argues on the basis of the existence of pleasure in the absence of pain. He sets such aspects as the basis through which individuals can achieve what they desire. This is also the epitome of morality in the society. However, the author does not come out clearly to state how utilitarianism explains the morality of people especially in pursuit of personal happiness. This theory explains how morality is a determinant of happiness. If the individual’s actions are moral, then amount of utility will increase (Newman 60). However, utilitarianism maintains that the pursuit for personal happiness at the expense of societal happiness does not determine morality.
The most fascinating aspect of this theory of normative ethics, as described by the author in this chapter, is that it focuses on the discussion of higher and lower levels of pleasure. For instance, there is the aspect of act utilitarianism, which argues that if the benefit of an action is more than the disadvantage of that action, then an action is morally right (Newman 61). Similarly, the theory reduces the value of an experience or the utility of an action. In this case, the theory reduces some experiences. For instance, the author argues that utility should not be measured on the basis of psychological comfort or feeling, but on the qualities that pleasurable actions can produce (61). In this case, the theory enables individuals, with a range of experiences, to dictate whether their pleasure should be of higher quality than others. In basic terms, the theory does not stipulate that actions be judged based on reductive mechanisms, but qualities of pleasure in relation to experience.
Chapter Five: Metaethics
Chapter five of this book introduces the reader to the concepts of metaethics. In this chapter, Newman introduces how metaethics is a branch of normative ethics concerned with what it means to be moral. For instance, it questions objective truth and absolute values (Newman 86). This theory is also concerned with the epitome of people’s values and how individuals ascribe to moral judgments. Cultural relativism, among other theories, is found within metaethics. The theory attempts to address the aforementioned issues, but in its own essence derives some problems found within the moral judgment. For instance, cultural relativism may be concerned with whether society’s can tolerate different cultures, progress in diversity, and coexists on the basis of moral standards.
According to the author, cultural relativism is premised the fact that different cultures have their codes of conduct (Newman 88). In this case, any disagreements based on morality cannot be solved for lack of universal moral standard across the societies. In simple words, there is no objective truth of moral judgment regarding right and wrong; instead moral judgment is based on societal opinion or cultural opinion. This theory believes that there is no absolute justification of moral judgments instead the moral judgment is relative to the people who hold certain opinion. This theory is significant because it holds the view that what one society consider morally right may not be right in another society. According to Newman, cultural relativism, therefore, calls for tolerance among individuals, societies and cultures. It is premised on a set of moral claims that enable one to conform to a particular belief found in a particular culture.