propose a scenario where you or someone you know are confronted with a moral dilemma relating to cultural diversity and multiculturalism. It cannot be the same as what was covered in the week one discussion.
Cultural diversity refers to religious, sexual, racial, and other forms of social difference. A moral dilemma is a situation in which one must make a decision between two or more options such that the options involve seemingly ethical and/or unethical conduct. Address the following questions:
What was the situation? What did the dilemma involve?
What would a subjective moral relativist say is the right approach to the dilemma? Why would that kind of relativist say that?
What would a cultural relativist say is the right approach to the dilemma? Why would that kind of relativist say that? Is that approach correct?
What did you or the person confronting the dilemma decide to do? What moral justification did you or they give? Is that approach morally correct?
Was there an objective moral truth (the objectively right thing to do) in this situation? Why or why not?
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
Moral Dilemma in a Workplace Setting
The Situation and Dilemma
In a workplace scenario, a colleague of mine, who practices a different religion and belongs to a different cultural background, faced discrimination and exclusion from team activities due to their religious practices. The dilemma involved whether to speak up and address the discrimination, risking potential conflict with other team members, or to remain silent to maintain harmony within the team.
Subjective Moral Relativist Perspective
A subjective moral relativist might argue that the right approach to this dilemma is based on individual beliefs and values. They might suggest that my colleague should act in a way that aligns with their personal moral compass, regardless of societal norms or cultural expectations. This relativist would emphasize the importance of personal autonomy and authenticity in decision-making.
Cultural Relativist Perspective
A cultural relativist, on the other hand, would likely advocate for understanding and respecting the cultural norms and values of all individuals involved. They might argue that my colleague should consider the cultural context of the discrimination and approach the situation with sensitivity to the diverse perspectives at play. The cultural relativist would prioritize maintaining cultural harmony and mutual respect among team members.
The approach suggested by a cultural relativist is valuable in promoting cross-cultural understanding and tolerance. However, in instances of discrimination or injustice, it may not always be morally correct to prioritize cultural norms over fundamental human rights and dignity.
Decision and Moral Justification
In this scenario, my colleague decided to address the discrimination they were facing by initiating a conversation with the team leader to raise awareness about the issue. The moral justification given was based on the belief that everyone deserves to be treated with respect and fairness in the workplace, irrespective of their cultural or religious background.
This approach aligns with principles of social justice and equality, emphasizing the importance of standing up against discrimination and advocating for inclusivity in diverse environments.
Objective Moral Truth
In this situation, there is an objective moral truth that discrimination based on cultural or religious differences is inherently wrong. Upholding principles of equality, fairness, and respect for individual rights should take precedence over cultural relativism when addressing issues of discrimination in any setting. While cultural sensitivity is important, it should not be used as a justification for perpetuating harmful behaviors or attitudes.
By taking a stand against discrimination and promoting a culture of inclusivity and respect, individuals can contribute to creating a more equitable and harmonious work environment that values diversity and multiculturalism.
