Introduction
There is a fundamental difference between equality and fairness. An “Equal Opportunity Employer” strive to provide each individual with an equal chance to employment and advance their career regardless of their background. Fairness, on the other hand, constitutes opportunities for applicants depending on their needs. These factors form the essence of all the aspects of the citizen’s conduct, including the behaviour of employers when determining who has access to the opportunities they offer.
Argument Against Some Cultural Practices
Multiculturism policies advocate accommodating various cultures or cultural practices within the social community. Sometimes, these policies may lead to situations where the observed rules undermine America’s identity (Smith, 2020). The frequent aspects that present the arguments are concerns about conflicting values, including individual freedom, gender equality, and religious tolerance. Critics argue that several cultural practices are incompatible with the fundamental American values. They insist that embracing these practices exposes the nation to the risk of dilution of its core principles that make its identity.
“Fair” and “Equal” Opportunity
Promoting fair opportunity involves acknowledging and addressing individual needs and circumstances. The interpretation of “Equal” from “Fair” opportunity presents a contrasting take on the two characters. Equal opportunity aims to provide every person with the same base or starting point (Van Laer et al., 2019). On the other hand, fair opportunity acknowledges that diverse challenges confront different individuals and may require customized support to address these challenges. This perspective allows for the evolution of strategies that place every person on the same footing. Employing “Fair” opportunities in diversity ensures that each individual has a substantial chance of success regardless of their initial profile.
Ethical Relativism
The principle of ethical relativism is that moral judgments are subjective and vary across cultures and individuals. The theory argues that there is no universal standard for evaluating morality (Cook, 2023). Furthermore, it depicts that right or wrong depends on cultural, societal, or personal perspectives.
Pros of Ethical Relativism
Various aspects of the theory form its merits. One of the advantages is that ethical relativism advocates for diversity. The theory promotes including various cultural practices in the community (Mudrack & E. Sharon Mason, 2020). This perspective promotes tolerance and respect amongst community members with different cultures. The behaviour allows individuals to recognize and appreciate diverse viewpoints in their daily endeavours.
Cons of Ethical Relativism
One significant drawback of the theory is the elevated exposure of the community to conflicts of interest. The different moral standards brought about by the diverse cultural practices make the community vulnerable to disagreements among members (Mudrack & E. Sharon Mason, 2020). Furthermore, it may introduce adverse cultures and practices accepted in particular cultures.
Legitimate Ethical Relativism vs. Other Forms of Relativism
There are various forms of relativism. These forms include “cultural, descriptive ethical, normative ethical relativism.” Ethical relativism is legitimate when the practices brought about by cultural diversity acknowledge the existence of shared human values (Mudrack & E. Sharon Mason, 2020). Regardless of the perspectives on acceptable moral standards, universal principles should be maintained. Nevertheless, there are several non-moral relativisms. Such relativism includes aspects relating to factual claims and aesthetic judgements.
Using Ethical Relativism to Guide Future Actions
Ethical relativism encourages understanding and respecting diverse moral perspectives. Nevertheless, it poses challenges in addressing issues that expose human rights to potential disruption. Striking a balance between cultural sensitivity and upholding universally recognized ethical principles is crucial (Cook, 2023). Various scholars argue that it is essential to maintain a decorum between cultural sensitivity and upholding universally recognized ethical principles. Ethical relativism can be applied as a framework for dialogue and understanding. Moreover, it is advisable to avoid moral relativism to justify actions that violate basic ethical norms.
References
Cook, J. W. (2023). Cultural relativism is an ethnocentric notion. Routledge EBooks, pp. 289–315. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003451341-19
Mudrack, P. E., & E. Sharon Mason. (2020). A relativistic approach to moral judgment in individuals: Review and reinterpretation. Business Ethics: A European Review, 29(2), 403–416. https://doi.org/10.1111/beer.12263
Smith, R. M. (2020). Toward Progressive Narratives of American Identity. Polity. https://doi.org/10.1086/708743
Van Laer, K., Verbruggen, M., & Janssens, M. (2019b). Understanding and addressing unequal career opportunities in the “new career” era: an analysis of the role of structural career boundaries and organizational career management. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2019.1660700
write