Moral relativists certainly don’t think so. But is there any moral rule that is universal, I.e., found in every culture?
I myself like to think there are certain broad principles like mercy and kindness that are. Although some cultures certainly show it more than others. In Muslim countries, they’ll chop off your hand for stealing an apple. But the Koran still says Allah is merciful. Ancient Rome thought mercy was a form of weakness. But they also produced a treatise on mercy called De Clementia (“concerning mercy”).
At this point, I want to make clear why I post this in GQ. I want this to be a purely ***factual *** question and debate.
Yeah, I did read once incest laws are pretty universal, which is interesting. It seems the human brain has a built-in disgust for the matter. This is no doubt due to the inherent danger of inbreeding, due to all the recessive genes for diseases. But even this may not be universal. Egyptian pharaohs sometimes married their sisters, I think. But for the purpose of this question, I will allow “near universal” too.
There are a few, known as cultural universals, but most things on that list aren’t moral rules. Some examples of ones which are, from Donald Brown, in his book Human Universals (1991):
The Golden Rule from the New Testimate (Do unto others as you would have other do unto you) would basically translate into respecting others as you would want to be respected. Being respected (and giving respect)is pretty much a basis for civilized moral behavior everywhere.
-Murder - It happens everywhere, but is there any culture that condones it?
-Justice - Perhaps this is an extension on reciprocity in a sense, but I would venture that all societies have a form of justice. We (let’s say “we” is readers of the The Dope) might not agree with it, but the group recognizes it. Danegild, or corporal punishment, or imprisonment, or indentured servitude, whatever it might be - there’s a form of restitution to the wronged either as individuals or as the group.
Sorry, but questions about morality don’t really lend themselves to factual discussion, and since you state you are interested in debate, this is better suited to Great Debates.
Define “murder”. For any definition you could work out, I trust there are thousands of us who could construct a case where the majority of the society would (emotionally, not necessarily legally!) condone it.
Not sure if its a moral rule as such, but I would think [i.e. based on no facts] that most cultures would recognise that children, especially the very young are not capable of informed intent and capacity to take responsibility for their actions. In other words any breach of laws or cultural norms by a kid would be judged differently to an adult’s breach.
Except in places where war is seen as an option, and except in places where you can legally be killed as the punishment for a crime, and except in places where respect can possibly be earned instead of it being something you have just for existing…
Treat sentient creatures that are valuable to your society better than sentient creatures (humans and animals) that are irrelevant or threatening to your society.
All moral rules are universal. But not everyone knows all of the moral rules.
If there’s a culture where rape is accepted, for instance, that doesn’t mean that rape is moral for those people. That means that that culture is wrong.
How about “eye for an eye”? The law of retribution. I think this is the very basis of justice in any society, as well as what keeps those who would otherwise abuse others in check (“absolute power corrupts” and all that). It’s what causes and/or prolongs wars. If that’s not universal (or near-universal), I don’t know what is.
You may be interested in looking through the examples that C. S. Lewis gave as “Illustrations of the Tao” in an appendix to The Abolition of Man. He lists (and gives quotations to support) the following:
The OP isn’t asking for moral rules which are absolute, i.e. have no exceptions; he’s asking for moral rules which are universal, i.e. are found in all human cultures. Pretty much all human cultures see killing another human being as morally problematic, something that requires a specific justification, and that is regarded as “murder” or equivalent where that justification is absent. They may differ as the justification or range of justifications they accept, but the basic rule; that killing requires a substantial justification and is gravely wrong without it, is probably universal.
The Victorian justice system did not recognize any difference in ages between offenders, and routinely locked children up in adult jails. Records indicate that children as young as 12 were executed by the state, often for what we would consider petty crimes in modern society.