Does morality vary from one culture to another?

Should it be based on the social or cultural norm of

the society? Defend your answer.

Yes, because each society has differing cultures, and thus different sets of; beliefs, principles, moral
values, and learned behaviors, that are generally passed on from generation to generation.
I’ll try my best to answer the question even though I can’t wrap my head around it.
Morality, in my opinion, should be based on both social and cultural norms. From my own
understanding and description of terms: society is a group of people living together (consisting of
societal groups) in a community. Society in general, upholds certain “social norms”, these norms are
attitudes and behaviors that are assumed to be acceptable behavior in a social group. These social
norms are assumed to be followed/or agreed upon in a community. Culture, on the other hand, are sets
of attitudes and behaviors in a group. Cultural norms, are sets of beliefs and attitudes that are
considered normal or typical in a cultural group.
If we were to base our standard of morality only on social norms of a society and society is viewed as
one social group, then in my own understanding, that society will have no sense of individuality, there
will be an absolute right and wrong, different cultural norms will not exist, and every societal group will
have the same cultural norms, although the society as a group might be organized, but then again it
might fail from not free will.
However, if we were to base our standard of morality only on cultural norms of social groups, in my own
understanding, then communities will be smaller and increase of quantity since everyone has different
moral norms, because people will only believe on their own beliefs of what’s right and wrong.
But if we were to base morality both on the social and cultural norms of a society, although unorganized
as a whole, there would be cohesiveness for the good of the society and the pleasure of individuals.

Are all human beings moral persons? Explain. Are all moral persons human beings? Explain.

No and yes. In my own understanding and research given, human beings that can consciously make
decisions about their own actions based on their morals, are then considered a moral person, whether
their action was immoral or not. Yet, not every human being is a moral person. Fetuses and babies can’t
be considered moral person since they can’t engage in behaviors that can be evaluated as moral and
immoral. The same with people who are in a vegetative state; they aren’t conscious of making such
moral decisions.

I define the term moral person as a “person” a human being regarded as an individual, that can by itself
have consciousness to engage in certain behaviors that can be evaluated as moral or immoral. That’s
why I say all moral person are human beings, but not all moral agents are human beings.

Animals are not human beings, but some can be moral agents. “Some animals are capable of responding
to moral motivations due to their sophisticated cognitive abilities - such as elephants, cetaceans (whales
and dolphins) and primates - and are capable of feeling things like empathy, compassion, pain and loss
of a loved one.”

In my own understanding, the definition of a “moral person” is different from “personhood”. Since
moral person is a human being capable of having morals and personhood is somewhat of a ticket to
deserve moral consideration, and I believe all living beings are to be morally considered but some higher
than others.
Luis Lidón Vienna. (2019, July 2). Are animals moral agents? www.efe.com. Retrieved May 31,
2022, from https://www.efe.com/efe/english/technology/are-animals-moral-agents/
50000267-4013881#:~:text=Some%20animals%20are%20capable%20of,loss%20of%20a
%20loved%20one.