To Each His Own: Cultural and Ethical Relativism

The philosopher Herodotus notes in his book The Histories that “If anyone, no matter who, were given the opportunity of choosing from amongst all the nations in the world the set of beliefs which he thought best, he would inevitably—after careful considerations of their relative merits—choose that of his own country. Everyone without exception believes his own native customs, and the religion he was brought up in, to be the best.”  James Rachels’ The Elements of Moral Philosophy includes a chapter discussing the differences between cultural and ethical relativism.  The former of the two concurs with Herodotus’ beliefs and consequently those of Okonkwo from Chinua Achebe’s Things Fall Apart.  Rachels initially defines cultural relativism to be “a theory about the nature of morality,” and disproves it as a fallacy. 

            The argument follows that each culture, as they have their own beliefs, each have their own objective forms of truth (which are essentially opinions).  This is displayed in Things Fall Apart as the differences in cultures, tribes, religions, and values that Okonkwo experiences.  He holds that he is universally right that a man should be powerful and the patriarchal head of the family.  He should hold his wives submissive and raise his children with a “tough love.”  His religion should be based around a healthy fear and respect for the gods.  However, when the Christians move in they hold different values from his, and Okonkwo regards them as abominable intruders.  Rachels would denounce this “truth” that Okonkwo knows in the remainder of his essay.  He writes that truth in one society is fallacy in another, and that we could no longer censure other countries’ values without essentially disproving the argument altogether.  Not only would it forbid us from criticizing the values of other countries, we could not even criticize ourselves to make improvements.  Rachels would state that Okonkwo has no grounds in accusing the Christians of defiling his tribe and his people because what they know is their “truth” and he cannot reject their truth in favor of his own, as per cultural relativism. 

            Ethical relativism in its definition relies on the fact that humans are apt to distinguish between options A and B, choose one as more ethically right or wrong, and make grounded judgments off of these paradigms.  This is generally how the world today exists, and it is prevalent in the text as well.  The Christians in Things Fall Apart act on the notion that their religion is more civilized and less heathen than that of the tribes.  Thus, they conquer and set up establishment in the tribes.  Okonkwo rejects this in favor of his own beliefs and religion.  If this were to be evaluated by Rachels’ ethical relativism, the Christians would be justified in their approach, as would Okonkwo.  Each is perfectly in their rights to choose (as per the theory of ethical relativism) A or B, represented by Christianity or the tribes’ polytheism.  In the conclusion of the chapter, Rachels states that “we can come to understand that our feelings are not necessarily perceptions of the truth- they may be nothing more than the result of cultural conditioning.”  He would argue that Okonkwo fights for his tribe’s original beliefs because that was how he was raised and that Christians work to change the people they believe to be heathens because that was how they were raised.