comparative ethics

comparative ethics, the empirical (observational) study of the moral beliefs and practices of different peoples and cultures in various places and times. It aims not only to elaborate such beliefs and practices but also to understand them insofar as they are causally conditioned by social, economic, and geographic circumstances. Comparative ethics, in contrast to normative ethics, is thus the proper subject matter of the social sciences (e.g., anthropology, history, sociology, and psychology).

(Read Peter Singer’s Britannica entry on ethics.)

Empirical studies show that all societies have moral rules that prescribe or forbid certain classes of action and that these rules are accompanied by sanctions to ensure their enforcement. Of particular interest in comparative ethics are the similarities and differences between the moral practices and beliefs of different people, as explained by physical and economic conditions, opportunities for cross-cultural contacts, and the force of inherited traditions facing new social or technological challenges. It has been observed, for example, that virtually every society has well-established norms dealing with such matters as family organization and individual duties, sexual activity, property rights, personal welfare, truth telling, and promise keeping, but not all societies have evolved the same norms for these various aspects of human conduct.

Some social scientists concentrate their attention on the universality of basic moral rules, such as those forbidding murder, theft, infidelity, and incest. Others are more concerned with the diversity of moral practices—e.g., monogamy versus polygamy; caring for the aged versus parricide; the forbidding of abortion versus voluntary feticide. The question then arises whether similarity or diversity is more fundamental, whether similarity supports the validity of the practice, and whether diversity supports a relativism and skepticism. Clearly a consensus of all peoples in a moral opinion does not of itself establish validity. On the other hand, widespread agreement may support the argument that morality is rooted in human nature, and, if human nature is fundamentally everywhere the same, it will also manifest this similarity in significant ways, including morality. Such questions are philosophical and lie beyond the scope of the social sciences, which are restricted to empirically verifiable generalizations.

Another question concerns the development of morals. Insofar as this is an empirical issue, it must be distinguished from the question whether there is progress in morality. For progress is an evaluative term—whether the moral ideals, for example, or the practices of civilized peoples, or both, are higher than those of primitive peoples is itself a question of moral judgment rather than of social science. Still, social scientists and moral philosophers alike have noted important changes that have taken place in the historical development of various peoples.