Noam Chomsky on Moral Relativism and Michel Foucault

Summary

In this thought-provoking debate, two intellectuals grapple with the complexities of moral relativism and universal values. One speaker critiques Michel Foucault's defense of postmodernism and moral relativism, arguing that despite cultural variations in moral norms, there must be inherent universal principles. They contend that moral values evolve, drawing from historical examples like the abolition of slavery and the progress of LGBTQ+ rights. The conversation explores whether cultural relativism truly rejects the possibility of universal ethics, suggesting that underlying universal moral values could guide cultural development. The debate highlights the tension between cultural autonomy and shared moral progress.

Takeaways

• 😀 Moral relativism, as expressed by Foucault, is challenged for being incoherent, as it presupposes universal constraints despite professing cultural relativism.
• 😀 While moral norms vary across time and culture, the possibility of universal moral principles is suggested, grounded in innate human constraints.
• 😀 Foucault's idea that truth and power are inextricably linked is questioned, with the argument that scientific progress and moral evolution occur through self-correcting procedures in the sciences.
• 😀 Moral progress is evident in the evolution of values such as the abolition of slavery, the acceptance of homosexuality, and gender equality, all of which were once considered morally acceptable but are now rejected.
• 😀 Despite cultural differences, there is a tendency in human history towards expanding moral values, such as more tolerance and less coercion, implying moral progress.
• 😀 Cultural relativism does not mean that all values are equally valid; rather, there is a fixed basis for acquiring culture and moral values, which allows for moral development.
• 😀 The example of the historical treatment of homosexuality demonstrates how deeply ingrained moral values can change over time, illustrating the potential for moral progress in society.
• 😀 The discussion of slavery provides an example of how moral disagreements can be debated and resolved through dialogue and the reevaluation of existing values.
• 😀 The Enlightenment's view of moral progress is debated, with the argument that some cultures may view the moral advancements of the West as a regression.
• 😀 The script argues that moral relativism, when taken to its extreme, denies the possibility of finding universal moral truths, yet it paradoxically depends on such truths to explain how cultures evolve.

Q & A

What is the key critique of Michel Foucault’s position on moral relativism?

The key critique is that Foucault's extreme form of moral relativism, which suggests that moral values can vary indefinitely, is incoherent. The speaker argues that moral relativism, even in its most extreme form, implicitly relies on universal values to function, particularly in terms of the inherent structures that guide moral development.

What does the speaker mean by 'moral relativism is incoherent'?

The speaker suggests that moral relativism is incoherent because it presupposes that moral values are entirely determined by culture, but this would require universal, innate structures to allow for the acquisition of culture itself. Without these universal structures, moral systems could not be acquired or developed.

How does the speaker use the example of human visual systems to explain moral values?

The speaker compares moral systems to human visual systems, explaining that while both can vary depending on experience, they are still governed by universal, innate constraints. Just as the human visual system has limits to its variation, so too do moral systems have a range of options within which they develop, guided by universal principles.

How does the speaker view the relationship between power and truth in Foucault’s philosophy?

The speaker acknowledges that power systems can influence scientific work and the acceptance of knowledge, citing examples like Stalinist biology and corporate influence on drug trials. However, the speaker argues that Foucault overstated the effect of power on regimes of truth, suggesting that the self-correcting nature of scientific work and the existence of universal moral values provide a stronger basis for understanding truth.

What historical examples does the speaker use to argue that moral progress is possible?

The speaker uses examples such as the abolition of slavery, the subjugation of women, and the acceptance of homosexuality as evidence of moral progress. These societal changes are presented as clear indicators that moral values can evolve over time and that our understanding of moral norms has deepened.

What is the significance of the case of Alan Turing in the discussion of moral progress?

Alan Turing is used as an example to illustrate how moral values have evolved. Turing, a brilliant mathematician and war hero, was persecuted by the British government for being homosexual, a practice that was once widely accepted as immoral. His case demonstrates how societal views on issues like sexuality have dramatically shifted in recent decades.

What does the speaker mean by 'moral values have advanced'?

The speaker argues that moral values have advanced over time, as evidenced by the widespread rejection of practices like slavery, the repression of women, and the criminalization of homosexuality. These shifts represent a deeper understanding and expansion of the moral sphere, moving towards greater tolerance and recognition of human rights.

How does the speaker respond to the idea that different cultures may view Western moral progress as regression?

The speaker acknowledges that other cultures may view Western moral progress, such as the acceptance of homosexuality, as a form of regression. However, the speaker argues that moral progress within a culture should be judged on its own terms, and that universal values—such as tolerance and equality—can be applied across cultures to some degree.

What is the argument regarding the connection between universal values and moral relativism?

The speaker argues that moral relativism, even in its extreme form, still relies on the presupposition of universal values. These universal values provide the framework within which moral systems can vary, and they are necessary for the very acquisition of culture and moral norms.

How does the speaker critique the view that all moral systems are equally valid?

The speaker critiques the idea that all moral systems are equally valid by pointing out that some moral norms, such as the acceptance of slavery or the repression of women, are now widely regarded as morally unacceptable. The speaker suggests that there is moral progress and that some cultural values are indeed better than others, based on an evolving understanding of human rights and equality.