Question one
Cultural relativism is the perception that the morals and ethics of a certain culture or community can only be valued and judged within the same culture. To Montaigne some cultures and moral beliefs seemed to him more reasonable than others, however, he recognizes the fact that there exists no universal moral truth or reasoning, but also describes man as a finite being without the capability of rising above his intrinsic state of stupidity and ignorance.” Now, to return to my subject, I think there is nothing barbarous and savage in that nation, from what I have been told, except that man calls barbarism whatever is not his own practice:..” in my opinion I concur with Montaigne as I support that one can only judge and view other culture in the context and contrast of the culture he live in. He expresses that cultural diversity lacks meaning so it will make no sense in terming him as a cultural relativist. Cultural relativism poses a danger in the society as it limits our ability to visualize clearly the reality at hand. It lacks a universal standard of classifying what is correct and what is wrong and hence a wrong can be right to another society thus creating loopholes for impunity.
Question two
Montaigne viewed the native as naïve, uncivilized and barbaric, people who have lived without human mind refashioning. “These nation, then, seem to me barbarous in this sense, that they have been fashioned very close to their original naturalness. The law of nature little by the human mind, and are still rule them” He describes the natives as people who live and ruled by natural laws. To him, the natives are in such a state of purity than himself and those who lived where he come from. They live a simple life free from political superiority, no commerce, no urge of the procession and accumulation of properties and people who were uncivilized at all.
Question three
Montaigne describes the natives as people who live under the code of cruelty and inhumane life. But it must be known that these inhumane acts are a retaliation of any threats that confronts them. Montaigne sees a European culture as more barbaric than that of natives. Reason was that European act in an inhumane way with reason such as expansion of boarders and claiming of victory over nations, while the native act in an inhumane way when they are confronted by threats and their actions is not to show their mighty to the other nations but to protect their community. “Their warfare is wholly noble and generous, and as excusable and beautiful as this human disease can be; its only among them is their rivalry in valor. They are not fighting for the conquest of new lands.” It is rational to value human life and freedom, the native have no urge of wealth and property from their invaders, I so find natives less barbarian than Europeans.
Question four
Montaigne views native as same in cannibal as the Europeans. He explains that the distinction between the native cannibals and the cruel Europeans as conquering same and have small differences. By taking of prisoners and determine their fate. “These men of ours do the same in their turn, they demand of their prisoners no more ransom than that they confess and acknowledge their defeat” they will torture their prisoners, torment them just in the name of proving to them that they are superior than their enemy same the European do to extract information to their enemies.
Reference
David Quint (1998) Montaigne and the Quality of Mercy:The Culture that Cannot Pardon: ‘Des Cannibales’ in the Larger Essais Princeton University Press,): 75-101
