According to the golden mean concept, moral behavior is the average of two different extremes, one marked by insufficiency and the other by excess. The virtues associated with Aristotle's ethics fall inside the mean, which creates a balance between the two extremes. This, according to the expert, is the ideal way to live in a society. This is because extremes of character, whether positive or negative, are not beneficial to others (Williams 1689). For example, when one is highly forceful, he or she is likely to cause others to lose confidence. Aristotle believed that virtue is found between a set of two vices, each of them involving either a deficiency or excess of the true virtue. He proceeded to give a practical example; in the case of witnessing a robbery with violence scenario, a coward lacks courage and hence cannot do anything (Williams 1689). On the other hand, a foolhardy person gets into danger without considering different factors in the situation. A neutral person holds the mean and acts virtuously.
Aristotle asserted that the difference between vice and virtue in both actions and emotions lies in the balance between the extremes. However, it is not just a simple matter of applying the virtue; an individual applies hands-on wisdom in a bid to decide the best course of action according to different variables in the situation. Practical wisdom is achieved as people grow up and desist from rules and then provides for the people to adapt to more independent and personality and virtue centric morality (Williams 1692). Different degrees of establishing mean in the extremes depend on variables in a given situation. However, being knowledgeable of what is suitable in a particular situation is hard and hence there is a need for a detailed moral training. The mean could be applied relatively and comparatively, and since there lacks a mathematical measure towards this aspect, people need thorough training on the application of the golden mean (Williams 1692).
In a practical situation, establishing the mean could prove to be a complex affair. Supposedly, the virtuous person is the ideal measure; some people could argue a person’s courage translates into another’s cowardice and hence there is a conflict in the metrics. To settle on the mean, there is the need to consider some virtuous people like through reading stories of the saints. Also, people have to engage in practice for them to be able to become substantially virtuous in their daily lives. The practice is not based on a realistically measurable tool that shows the extent to which an individual is virtuous (Dillard, Jesse, Rogers, and Yuthas 17). Looking at Aristotle’s concept critically, one could question the mean for criminal activities such as murder and robbery. Since people cannot apply the concept in their daily activities freely, it is reasonable to conclude that the golden mean concept does not offer a good roadmap for navigating virtuous behavior.
Cultural Relativism
Cultural relativism is the notion that the behavior, knowledge, beliefs, and values of people are supposed to be viewed within their cultural contexts. It is among the most fundamental conceptions in sociology because it affirms and acknowledges networks between the larger social framework, trends, and daily lives of people in an individual capacity. This concept provides that people take on life on the grounds of their individual moral standing as it is allowed in their cultural origins (Healy 14). The contemporary world is diverse and dynamic and for this reason; imposing a rigid way of doing things on people in individual capacities is likely to cause friction among different discourses in various ways. Cultural relativism is marred by potential problematic issues as they are shown and discussed in this section of the paper.
Firstly, in a typical society, the truth is relative and so is justice. In the modern global society, many practices are tolerated because they are culturally diverse although they hurt other people’s sense of justice or legal culture (An-Na'im 38). For instance, many companies authorize Sikhs to carry with them their ritual knives in planes since according to their cultures, an individual should not separate with his knife. According to the law and other individuals who do not subscribe to that culture, carrying a knife to the plane is seen as a potential security hazard. The fact that these people are allowed to carry such a weapon in secured places while others are not allowed is tantamount to bias on the grounds of equality. The Sikhs have an added advantage and can take the rest of passengers at ransom using their knives (An-Na'im 39). It is a negative aspect of cultural relativism that can be cured through common operational regulations for all the people despite their origins. It is the case because applying security provisions relatively is potentially detrimental to the larger community. There are sensitive issues that have to overshadow cultural beliefs and treat people equally before the law.
Secondly, a majority of social behaviors should be comprehended in their individual cultural frameworks and are hence justifiable as legitimate in these contexts. In this sense, it becomes simple to rationalize an individual’s behavior as traditional in a society that embraces such relativism. For example, one can justify violence against women as one of the cultural comprehensions of life in his background (An-Na'im 42). However, this attitude towards women is significantly different from that of people reading from other cultural backgrounds. Since people are emotionally and mentally attached to their cultural beliefs, it is difficult for them to be dissuaded from practicing them in a manner infringing on the rights of other people. Regarding the generalization of individual beliefs to other people, this issue can be remedied through developing common concepts that apply to all people. Regardless of cultural backgrounds, all people must understand that violence against women is prohibited and uncivilized (An-Na'im 42). In the same way, it is important to discourage the aspect of male chauvinism among men in different societies so that in general, they manage to respect their female counterparts even beyond their cultural understanding. The individualistic view of culture as the general way of doing things can also be cured through creating and applying necessary rules and regulations. For example in the African countries, some communities uphold cultural relativism through practicing uncivilized rituals such as female genital mutilation. The governments develop stringent measures that curb the notion that young girls should go through circumcision.
Works Cited
An-Na'im, Abdullahi Ahmed, ed. Human rights in cross-cultural perspectives: A quest for consensus. University of Pennsylvania Press, 2010.
Dillard, Jesse, Rodney Rogers, and Kristi Yuthas. "Organizational change: in search of the golden mean." Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change 7.1 (2011): 5-32.
Healy, Lynne M. "Universalism and cultural relativism in social work ethics." International Social Work 50.1 (2007): 11-26.
Williams, Tony D. "Individual variation in endocrine systems: moving beyond the ‘tyranny of the Golden Mean’." Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences 363.1497 (2008): 1687-1698.
