1. In the Western culture, arranged marriage is perceived with negativity. This can be attributed to the foundational premise of individualism that informs the cultural framework of the western society. For the western people, the idea of their spouse being selected by their parent is an attack on their individuality and seen as anomalous to their personal autonomy. Love marriage represents the freedom to choose their partner and making the rush to the first love is filled with excitement. Arranged marriage has a range of pitfalls. The first problem with arranged marriage is that parents who select the partners for their children feel that they have more experience than the children do. They are of the view that they can make better choice of partners for their children and the choice of the children are considered to be impulsive and lacking in depth. Children who do not conform to the decision of their parents have the fear of being disowned by the parents and being banished from the family. Secondly, many young people long for finding their soul mate, the possibility of an arranged marital union poses an impediment to that aspiration. Children want to experience that intimacy with their partners on different levels before making the final choice about the biggest decision of their life. However, the motivation behind finding partners for the children is rooted in the idea of endogamy that may be related to religious belief or race. Religious freedom is perceived as a threat to the sanctity of the religion.
2. The term moral relativism refers to the notion that there is no universal or absolute cluster of moral principles. It is considered to be a version that advocates for the to each to her own and those who abide by this philosophy argue that nobody should have the right to judge the life of another person. Moral relativism are mainly of three types- descriptive moral relativism, meta-ethical moral relativism and normative moral relativism. The cultural definition of moral relativism views that morality is defined by culture and therefore it is believed to be true. Although there are certain values that are universally valid like the value of honesty or the incest taboo and rape that is universally proscribed (Demuijnck 2015). Different cultures have their own set of moral standards and interpretations of morality. Therefore drawing from this argument it can be stated that moral relativism is true. The meta-ethical aspect of moral relativism is of the view that there can be no objective grounds for the preference of moral values of one culture over the other culture (Velleman 2015). There is a tendency among people to believe that their culture upholds the most appropriate moral values. Moral principles are based on the unique principles, ethics and customs prevalent in the society. However, from the perspective of normative moral relativism it is believed that all societies should have universal and uniform ethos governing their lives. Based on the above arguments it can be stated that moral relativism is true and it s ultimately governed by the different cultures.
Demuijnck, G., 2015. Universal values and virtues in management versus cross-cultural moral relativism: An educational strategy to clear the ground for business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 128(4), pp.817-835.
Levy, N., 2014. Moral relativism: A short introduction. Oneworld Publications.
Velleman, J.D., 2015. Foundations for Moral Relativism: Second Expanded Edition. Open Book Publishers.