Explicate the problem of cruelty in relation to moral relativism. How can we pursue hospitality or moral values (v. vital values) to overcome our crueler tendencies as humans if we remain committed to moral relativism (explicitly or implicitly)? How might Lengbeyer and Rachels offer us solutions?
Sample solution
Dante Alighieri played a critical role in the literature world through his poem Divine Comedy that was written in the 14th century. The poem contains Inferno, Purgatorio, and Paradiso. The Inferno is a description of the nine circles of torment that are found on the earth. It depicts the realms of the people that have gone against the spiritual values and who, instead, have chosen bestial appetite, violence, or fraud and malice. The nine circles of hell are limbo, lust, gluttony, greed and wrath. Others are heresy, violence, fraud, and treachery. The purpose of this paper is to examine the Dante’s Inferno in the perspective of its portrayal of God’s image and the justification of hell.
In this epic poem, God is portrayed as a super being guilty of multiple weaknesses including being egotistic, unjust, and hypocritical. Dante, in this poem, depicts God as being more human than divine by challenging God’s omnipotence. Additionally, the manner in which Dante describes Hell is in full contradiction to the morals of God as written in the Bible. When god arranges Hell to flatter Himself, He commits egotism, a sin that is common among human beings (Cheney, 2016). The weakness is depicted in Limbo and on the Gate of Hell where, for instance, God sends those who do not worship Him to Hell. This implies that failure to worship Him is a sin.
God is also depicted as lacking justice in His actions thus removing the godly image. The injustice is portrayed by the manner in which the sodomites and opportunists are treated. The opportunists are subjected to banner chasing in their lives after death followed by being stung by insects and maggots. They are known to having done neither good nor bad during their lifetimes and, therefore, justice could have demanded that they be granted a neutral punishment having lived a neutral life. The sodomites are also punished unfairly by God when Brunetto Lattini is condemned to hell despite being a good leader (Babor, T. F., McGovern, T., & Robaina, K. (2017). While he commited sodomy, God chooses to ignore all the other good deeds that Brunetto did.
Finally, God is also portrayed as being hypocritical in His actions, a sin that further diminishes His godliness and makes Him more human. A case in point is when God condemns the sin of egotism and goes ahead to commit it repeatedly. Proverbs 29:23 states that “arrogance will bring your downfall, but if you are humble, you will be respected.” When Slattery condemns Dante’s human state as being weak, doubtful, and limited, he is proving God’s hypocrisy because He is also human (Verdicchio, 2015). The actions of God in Hell as portrayed by Dante are inconsistent with the Biblical literature. Both Dante and God are prone to making mistakes, something common among human beings thus making God more human.
To wrap it up, Dante portrays God is more human since He commits the same sins that humans commit: egotism, hypocrisy, and injustice. Hell is justified as being a destination for victims of the mistakes committed by God. The Hell is presented as being a totally different place as compared to what is written about it in the Bible. As a result, reading through the text gives an image of God who is prone to the very mistakes common to humans thus ripping Him off His lofty status of divine and, instead, making Him a mere human. Whether or not Dante did it intentionally is subject to debate but one thing is clear in the poem: the misconstrued notion of God is revealed to future generations.
References
Babor, T. F., McGovern, T., & Robaina, K. (2017). Dante’s inferno: Seven deadly sins in scientific publishing and how to avoid them. Addiction Science: A Guide for the Perplexed, 267.
Cheney, L. D. G. (2016). Illustrations for Dante’s Inferno: A Comparative Study of Sandro Botticelli, Giovanni Stradano, and Federico Zuccaro. Cultural and Religious Studies, 4(8), 487.
Verdicchio, M. (2015). Irony and Desire in Dante’s” Inferno” 27. Italica, 285-297.
Sample Answer
Sample Answer
Cruelty and Moral Relativism: Navigating Hospitality and Vital Values
Cruelty, defined as the deliberate infliction of pain or suffering on others, poses a significant moral challenge in the context of moral relativism. Moral relativism asserts that moral principles are subjective and vary across individuals, cultures, or societies. This relativistic view complicates the pursuit of hospitality and vital values, such as compassion and empathy, in overcoming cruel tendencies as humans. Scholars like Lengbeyer and Rachels provide insights into reconciling moral relativism with the promotion of moral values to mitigate cruelty.
The Problem of Cruelty in Relation to Moral Relativism
In a morally relativistic framework, the concept of cruelty becomes nuanced and context-dependent. What may be perceived as cruel in one cultural context could be deemed acceptable or even virtuous in another. The absence of universal moral standards in moral relativism raises questions about how to address and condemn acts of cruelty that may be justified within certain cultural or individual belief systems.
Moreover, the subjective nature of moral relativism can lead to moral skepticism, where individuals may struggle to discern right from wrong or justify moral judgments in the face of divergent perspectives. This moral ambiguity can contribute to a lack of accountability for acts of cruelty and hinder efforts to cultivate hospitality and vital values that prioritize human dignity and well-being.
Pursuing Hospitality and Vital Values within Moral Relativism
Despite the challenges posed by moral relativism, there are ways to promote hospitality and vital values to counteract cruel tendencies while respecting diverse moral frameworks. One approach is to emphasize the intrinsic worth of moral values that transcend cultural or individual differences, such as compassion, fairness, and respect for human rights. By appealing to these universal aspects of morality, individuals can strive to uphold ethical standards that prioritize the welfare of others.
Lengbeyer and Rachels offer perspectives on addressing moral relativism and promoting moral values in the face of cruelty. Lengbeyer advocates for a form of “cultural moral realism,” which acknowledges the existence of shared moral truths across cultures while respecting cultural diversity. This approach encourages individuals to engage in cross-cultural dialogues and ethical reflections to identify common ground and ethical principles that can guide behavior towards greater compassion and empathy.
Rachels, on the other hand, emphasizes the importance of objective moral standards that transcend cultural relativism. He argues for a “minimum conception of morality” that includes fundamental principles such as honesty, fairness, and respect for human life. By establishing a baseline of universal moral norms, individuals can navigate moral differences and address acts of cruelty through a shared commitment to upholding essential ethical values.
Solutions Offered by Lengbeyer and Rachels
Lengbeyer’s cultural moral realism and Rachels’ minimum conception of morality provide frameworks for reconciling moral relativism with the pursuit of hospitality and vital values. By recognizing common ethical principles while respecting cultural diversity, individuals can cultivate a sense of shared humanity that transcends moral relativism’s subjectivity. Through critical reflection, dialogue, and a dedication to universal ethical norms, individuals can strive to overcome cruel tendencies and uphold moral values that prioritize compassion, empathy, and justice.
In conclusion, while moral relativism presents challenges in addressing cruelty and promoting moral values, scholars like Lengbeyer and Rachels offer insights into navigating these complexities. By embracing a nuanced understanding of cultural diversity, acknowledging shared moral truths, and upholding universal ethical standards, individuals can work towards fostering hospitality, compassion, and vital values that counteract cruelty and promote a more ethical and empathetic world.
