Tuesday 1 October 2013

Difference between Moral Principle, Moralization and Ethics: Case Study of Race

Human society has always been challenged by ideas of good and bad, what is morally correct, what is acceptable and what is not acceptable, and through such challenges, have created a coherent idea of moral principles from practices of religion, law and culture. Cultural theorists argues that thinking through the differences between moral principles, moralism and ethics is important as it allows the deconstruction of social ideas and behaviours regarding right and wrong and subsequently questions power structures. Cultural Studies is the work of ethics, where constant engagement with morality is encouraged, rather than simply solidifying a claim. This essay will argue that understanding moral principles, moralism and ethics is important using race as a caste study. It will examine how engaging with these concepts allow the deconstruction of race and understanding the creation behind social perceptions of it, and how all that helps us better understand the world we perceive.

Moral principle and moralism represent a more humanist model of morality, whereas ethics and its practices are associated with poststructuralist thinking. In a nutshell, to be poststructuralist means to question and deconstruction every fibre of existence. I will not explain poststructuralism in too much depth in this post, but I encourage those curious about it to research Michel Foucault one of the key theorists in poststructuralism. Moral principles are a set of "practices" that are labelled as being right or wrong. Moralisation is the dogmatic promotion of that claim. Ethics, as mentioned, is a more poststructuralist perspective of moral principles where a certain practice is questioned regarding its construction as being right or wrong. For example; it is considered in modern society that slavery is wrong and this assessment is a moral principle as it makes the claim that it is either good or bad. To embody the idea that slavery is wrong and promoting it as such is moralism, whereas ethics is the notion of problematizing this claim. Ethics look to break down the idea of slavery with questions such as; who claims that slavery is wrong? what makes someone a slave? on the basis of what criteria is slavery bad? Understanding the difference between these terms create a conflict in the foundations of morality - where the idea of morality being inherent and inbuilt in humans is challenged by a Foucaultian concept that morality is constructed as a result of a pressuring power structure that humans are always subjected to (Mansfield, 2000 p55). This understanding of ethics and morality is important as the idea of inherent morality can be challenged and questioned by an ethical approach, which can encourage the constant engagement of what is right and wrong.


French philosopher Michel Foucault (1926-1984)

The understanding of morality, moralism and ethics can be used to dissect and evaluate the concept of race. The idea of "race is not a biological or scientific category.  It is a social construction that mobilises differences in physical attributes - such as hair, skin colour, physiognomy and so on - as symbolic markers in order to differentiate one group socially from another" (Hall cited in Pugliese 2013). As a result of historical practices such as colonisation and the development of modern science, the human race have managed to socially construct a variety of moralistic attitudes towards race. An idea that derived from colonialism is the concept of the racial hierarchy which identifies an individual by his/her perceived race and positions him/her "along [a] discriminatory scale that produces real social affects" (Pugliese, 2013) such as slavery.

Racial hierarchies assembling a sense of morality regarding a race can be explored through the example of the Transatlantic Slave Trade from the 16th century. This example, through it means of justification, such as ideas of Africans being savages and unclean (Hall, 1997 p241-3), constructed a moral principle towards a particular race - Blacks are labelled slaves and they are bad. Slavery was predicated upon the Black race being less intelligent than the White race, justifying their moral stance and condemning Blacks as inferior to White Europeans (Gerritsen & McFarlane 2009 p165). The sense of morality was further justified by the development of sciences. Ideas that explored race theories such as physiognomy and phrenology "were instrumental in legitimising the colonial conquest and imperial domination of non-European peoples" (Pugliese, 2013). Moral distinctions were made towards a certain race, and these moral principles dictate how a certain group of people were viewed and treated.

The Transatlantic Slave trade started in Europe where primary goods such as textiles and equipment were taken to West Africa. From there labour in the form of African slaves were forcefully taken to the Caribbean where good such as coffee, tobacco were created in tropical climates and fed back into Europe. 


Moralism is the enforcement of these dualistic, racial ideologies of good and bad through assertive means. "This racialised discourse is structured by a set of binary oppositions. There is the powerful opposition between 'civilisation' (white) and 'savagery' (black)" (Hall, 1997 p243). The act of slavery and the three centuries of slave trading from Africa to the Americas in itself is a promotion of the developed idea that Blacks are subhuman and inferior to the White race. This practice became in a sense a "normal" aspect, and it was instrumental in crafting the dichotomous perception that the White race was good, and Blacks were bad and inferior. This racialised discourse becomes a present figure in society and culturally imbedded and enforced by habitus and performance. The American Civil War that took place from 1861 to 1865 was a battle between the Slavery supporting Confederate States and the Slavery opposing Union states led by President Abraham Lincoln. A twenty-first century perspective would be inclined to support Lincoln as it is deemed good that slavery be abolished and equality be for all human beings to be provided, but ethics and poststructuralism will ask, is this idea of equality and liberty an idea that has been inherent in individuals or is it the moral principle that a certain power structure idealises? The pre-Civil War American morality was widely supporting of slavery and the poor treatment of Blacks, yet the power that Abraham Lincoln possessed, gave him the ability to shift a cultural paradigm regarding morality, where slavery would now be considered a wrong practice.

This is an example of Moralisation - Blacks are being promoted and literally advertised as slaves, reinforcing the Moral Principle that slavery is acceptable. 

Ethics problematises claims about good and bad by dissecting the very foundations of a concept; which in this case is racial morality. What makes slavery a good or bad thing? As mentioned, the argument for slavery was justified by ideas of racial inferiority and the development of science. The rise of ideas such as liberty and human rights started to oppose this traditional concept that slavery was "normal" and started to form a sense of morality that conflicted with the previous cultural paradigm as mentioned. It was through the violence of a Civil War that helped settle on a particular moralistic ideology, that was later supported by Law. Once Law began to enforce these moral distinctions, culture and society began to idealise these morals too, something that it had not previously done with slavery. Once this power system was put into place, the sense of morality was shifted to that of equality and liberty as opposed to a racial hierarchy that oppressed the Blacks.

The importance of understanding morals, moralism and ethics raises a variety of question regarding race; could racial perceptions be inherent or are they structured by social powers? Where does racism come from? "As Eric William succinctly puts it 'slavery was not born of racism: rather, racism was the consequence of slavery'" (Young 2009 p64). This suggests that racism is not a human essence, it is formed from societal moralism, hence if a power structure imposes the idea that slavery is acceptable, then the rest of society will also begin to deem it acceptable. It is not the race that is essentially categorised as slavery but the functionality of the race that defines it as such. Functionality is a social construct, for example; a table is given the essence of a table by its functions, it is not inherently a table, but rather given "table-like" properties to define it as a table. Racism follows from the degradation of a race, especially the placement of one on a racial hierarchy, again justifying "the lawfulness of slavery in America" (Higginbotham & Price 1979 p595) and the treatment of Blacks. "According to Nietzsche, the reason for our moral crisis is that the traditional foundations of morality no longer function" Drenthen (2007 p375) writes in reference to clash between religious and modern, scientific morality. In a society that is slowly starting to reject previously historically acceptable morality such as slavery, people are in a state of confusion as to which power structure to adhere by. And it is in these conflicting ideas that the importance in understanding the differences between morality, moralism and ethics.

Where does your morality come from? Does it stem from family? Science? Religion? Morals are environmentally constructed from what we see, hear and feel. Does that mean inherent goodness does not exist? 

Cultural Studies theorists argue that it is important to differentiation between moral principle, moralisation and ethics as it allows an individual to openly examine a moral principle and trace it back historically and decide whether is it human essence or functionality constructed by power. Morality is the principle to which society adheres to, moralism is the practice and promotion of morality and ethics problematises moral claims and begins to deconstruct the foundations of morality. Cultural Studies attempts to deconstruct social structures and to question the moral settings in accordance to time and space. An understanding of ethics, moralism and morality, empowers the individuals so they can shape their own senses of good and bad and question power structures. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Drenthen, M (2007) 'New wilderness landscapes as moral criticism: A Nietzschean perspective on our contemporary fascination with wilderness', Ethical Practices: Journal of the European Ethics Network, vol. 14, no. 4 pp.371-403

Gerritsen, A & McFarlane, A (2009) 'Expanding Horizons' in Kumin, B (ed.), The European World 1500-1800: An Introduction to Early Modern Europe, Routledge, New York

Hall, S (1997) "The Spectacle of the Others", Representation: Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices, Milton Keynes, Open University Press

Higginbotham, D & Price, Jr. (1979) 'Was It Murder for a White Man to Kill a Slave? Chief Justice Martin Howard Condemns the Peculiar Institution in North Carolina', The William and Mary Quarterly, vol. 36, no. 4, pp.593-601

Mansfield, N (2000) "Foucault: the Subject, and Power," Subjectivity: Theories of Self from Freud to Haraway, Sydney, Allen & Unwin

Pugliese, J (2013) Week 10 Lecture: Race, PowerPoint Slides, CIL120: Living Culture, Macquarie University, Sydney

Young, R (2009) Signs of Race in Poststructuralism, Maryland, University Press of America

Zylinska, Joanna (2006) 'Chapter 4: Cultural Studies and Ethics' in Hall, G and Birchall, C (eds.) New Cultural Studies: Adventures in Theory, Edinburgh, Edinburgh University Press, p 70-87

Friday 27 September 2013

Understanding Cultural Relativism: Case Study of Force Feeding in Mauritania

Cultural relativism is the statement that one's cultural viewpoint and practices should not be measured or judged against an observers individual background. By thinking about culture relativistically, anthropologists have the uncanny ability to view, interpret and subsequently present what is ethnocentrically considered the "weird" or "unjust" into the normal and the right. Say for example you saw a man drop a sandwich on the ground, pick it up and resume eating. Immediately you will think that he is "gross" and unhygienic. This is called ethnocentrism and it is a normal functionality of a human being. If this situation were to be analysed through cultural relativism, you could consider many justifications for it; maybe the person is deeply connected to the earth and does not consider dirt and grass to be unhygienic but natural. Cultural relativism allows individuals to withhold judgment and try to understand practices from an insiders perspective. To further analyse the correlation between ethnocentrism and cultural relativism, the cultural practice that I am going to analyse is the practice of gavage or force-feeding in the West Saharan nation of Mauritania. If one was to view gavage ethnocentrically from a Western perspective, the practice of force-feeding women in order to satisfy the Mauritanian image of "fat being sexy" (Vice, 2013) would seem barbaric.  

Being initially ethnocentric presents a starting point for ethnographical researchers to work from. In Mauritania, roughly 21% of the population live under $1.25 a day (UNDP, 2008) - in a country where food is scarce, female obesity is seen as a sign of wealth and prosperity. In tandem with this cultural perception, gavage is imposed onto daughters by parents. "Parents send their daughters to rural fattening camps, where they are force-fed over 15,000 calories a day in camel milk, figs, oiled breadcrumbs and couscous" (Vice on HBO, 2013). This method of fattening is often seen as being torturous and ignorant of developing health problems for the women.  



After establishing the ethnocentric viewpoints, anthropologists must restrain judgment and consider the context of the practice. To be morally relativistic means to withhold all judgment. Anthropologists however, prefer to approach cultural relativism through a methodological approach which states moral judgments are kept from empirical claims, moral judgments are only made after further understanding of practice and context. Let us compare Mauritanian culture to Western culture through the tool of normative relativism (Spiro 1986, p260) - which states that as there are no universal standards for judging culture, we must treat each culture equally. The reason behind the practice of gavage is linked to the West African idea that a skinny women is a sign of her family's poor status. This perception becomes internalized and the idea of fat indicating beauty and a high-level of sexual attractiveness is subconsciously agreed upon in the Mauritanian context. In the West, skinny is considered beautiful and women undergo practices such as cosmetic surgery (liposuction) to fit the image of beauty, paralleling our Mauritanian context. Both practices have been criticized (internationally and internally) for its health concerns; gavage has always been connected to heart failure, malformations and infertility. Forcefully becoming skinny in the West has been heavily linked to anorexia and bulimia nervosa.

Paralleling our investigation of gavage in Mauritania, we see that in the West anorexia nervosa is becoming a serious health issue amongst young women. Both stem from a desire to fit the social criteria of beauty and sexual attractiveness.

The pursuit of a socially perfect body has caused women to confine to cultural practices that could potentially be life-threatening. Here cultural relativism is an effective tool, as it has the ability to compare paralleling practices from two unique contexts with a withholding of judgment. Cultural relativism can have a negative effect, as it can be used as an excuse to promotes hate, violence, injustice and atrocities on a universal scale. In this example of gavage, we see that the practice has started to be criticized within its own culture, indicating that gavage is not merely a marginalized practice on a global scale, but also in modern day Mauritania. Yet gavage and Western cultures desire to be skinny both have paralleling health problems. Raising the question where does health and desire for perfection meet?

Bibliography

Spiro, M. (1986) Cultural Relativism and the Future of Anthropology, Cultural Anthropology 1(3): 259-286

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), 2008, Human Development Indices, viewed 14 August 2013
< http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/HDI_2008_EN_Tables.pdf >

Vice (2013), Vice Episode 5: Winners & Losers, Broadcast Documentary Series, HBO, Brooklyn

Vice on HBO (2013) The Fat Farms of Mauritania, viewed 14 August 2013
< http://hbo.vice.com/episode-five/ep-5-seg-2 >

Introduce Yourself to the 21st Century

Welcome to the 21st century, an oil-driven, commercialised, politically unstable, war filled, scientifically awesome, crazy, confusing, and a constantly evolving era in history. If you had to briefly sum up this time period, how would you do it? In one sentence, how would you describe the 21st century?

Street orphans in Sao Paolo, Brazil

See, everyone is different and everyone brings their own knowledge, interests and their own discipline and learning to the fore of the discussion. A historian will tell you that the 21st century is a result of learning from human errors, an era shaped by the actions of people in the past in fields of the sciences, humanities and commerce. A geophysicist will tell you that the 21st century is insignificant in the large picture, plates move roughly 7 cm's a year, 7 metres a century. Human behaviour and development may be great but the plates move due to convection currents below our continental plates and no amount of human intervention can stop the Earth from doing her business. A geographer will tell you that the 21st century is a diversity of people and nature, and the dichotomous relationship between the two. It's about how people interact with places and spaces. A politician will give you a different answer every time you ask the question. So don't ask them anything.

The Boxing Day Tsunami, 2004 had an epicentre near Sumatra, Indonesia. The countries shown are the ones that were mainly effected. The death toll of the disaster reached 227, 898 with 167, 540 (73.5%) of the casualties coming from Indonesia. 
The world is beautiful, yet such a mystery. It is a tapestry of different cultures, languages and perspectives. This blog is designed to understand the world from the views of different people and different cultures and bring it together . Understanding the world from different disciplines puts into perspective our place in it, and what we can do to better it for ourselves and our future generations.


A photography of Patagonia, located in the Southern Tip of South America.