The weight of anthropological psychological and historic


The weight of anthropological, psychological, and historic evidence suggests that moral beliefs are relative to groups or individuals and there are no universal norms, let alone universally valid ones. Benedict argues that the term “morality” means “socially approved habits,” and the expressions “it is morally good” is synonymous with “it is habitual.”

Does that mean that there is nothing which is “intrinsically” or “unconditionally” or “absolutely” moral—or immoral?

Do you agree or disagree with Ruth Benedict’s ideas? If you do agree with her, does that mean there is nothing which is “intrinsically” or “unconditionally” or “absolutely” moral or immoral? If you disagree with her ideas please explain.

Request for Solution File

Ask an Expert for Answer!!
Business Economics: The weight of anthropological psychological and historic
Reference No:- TGS01111424

Expected delivery within 24 Hours