In section 11.2, Rachels proposes what he claims is a culture-neutral standard, which will allow people of any culture to morally assess the social practices of a particular culture.

Rachels’ standard (summarized by me) is this:

A social/cultural practice is good if it is beneficial to the people who are affected by it, and is bad if it is harmful to the people who are affected by it. (144)

By calling this standard “culture-neutral”, Rachels, in effect, is claiming that people of all cultures can agree on whether a given social practice is harmful or beneficial to the people who are affected by it.

Your philosophical task: assess Rachels’ claim by considering the following points:

  • do all cultures agree on whether a given practice is “beneficial” or “harmful” to a given person – e.g., to a person who is being punished, or to the people in their culture?
  • do all cultures agree on which people are affected by a certain practice (such as punishment by death for having a child out of wedlock or other practices)?
  • how do your answers affect your assessment of Rachels’ standard?

Decide whether Rachels has come up with a culture-neutral standard, and support your answer with reasons. Feel free to use examples of cultural practices from Rachels Chapter 11 or from other sources.

In Chapter 12, Rachels presents Glaucon’s challenge, in which Glaucon asks:

Why should we care about doing what is right?

Rachels then goes on to consider various answers to this question. These include:

  • two religious replies (The Divine Command Theory and Immanuel Kant’s reply)
  • two secular replies (The Social Contract Theory and Utilitarianism).

Rachels argues that none of these replies is fully adequate, and so Glaucon’s challenge remains.

Then in the lecture, we consider one further response to Glaucon’s question, namely an answer given by Socrates, and we pose a skeptical question about it (re: finding a bag of money).

Your task:

  • Consider these five answers to Glaucon’s challenge, and decide which one seems to you strongest.
  • State your choice, and make a case that the answer you have chosen is fully adequate, by defending it against the point(s) brought against it. For example, if you choose to argue that The Divine Command Theory is a fully adequate reply to Glaucon, state this choice and then reply to the objections that Rachels raises to this theory.