RELATVSM

Assoc. Prof. Dr. ehnaz ahinkaraka

ETHCAL RELATVSM

Ethical Relativism: no universal/valid

standards or rules can be used to guide or
evaluate the morality of an act.

Morality is relative to the norms of ones

culture.

Thus, no common framework for agreement on

ethical matters among different societies.

Benefits

Recognizing the distinction between individual and

social values, customs, and moral standards

Criticisms
1. Some moral beliefs are culturally relative,
but some are not

e.g. Dressing may depend on local custom, but slavery,

torture may not

2. Ignores individual moral beliefs

e.g. If one doesnt believe in some moral practices of

his/her society, then does s/he have to hold the same
views?

Some claim that relativism does not leave room

for moral reforms or improvement in a society. Do
you agree?

UTLTARANSM:
A CONSEQUANTALST APPROACH

Utilitarianism

Making ethical decisions based on a cost-benefit

analysis of the consequences of the behavior or action
taken.

The basic view of utilitarianism is that an

action is judged as right, good, or wrong on
the basis of its consequences.

i.e. The calculated consequences or results of

an action

 Problems with utilitarianism:

No agreement exists about the definition of
the good to be maximized
No agreement exists about who decides
No criteria to measure the costs and
benefits of stakeholders
Does not consider the individual
Principles of rights and justice are ignored

UNVERSALSM:
A DEONTOLOGCAL APPROACH

Also referred to as deontological /

nonconsequentialist ethics

The rightness or wrongness of an action

depends on intrinsic qualities, not on the
consequences.

Kants principle of the categorical imperative:

take action considering the way you want
others react on this action.

 The major weaknesses of universalism

(and Kants categorical imperative):
Principles are imprecise and lack practical
utility
Hard to resolve conflicts of interest
Does not allow for prioritizing ones duties

COMPARSON OF ETHCAL
PRNCPLES
Universalism
Ethical concepts are
impartial;
They apply to everyone;
Moral come before selfinterest.

Utilitarianism
Focuses on the consequences
The action is right if
maximum satisfaction is
obtained by everyone.

Relativism
Morals can change according
to time, the context, and
personal opinions.

TWO THNGS TO DSCUSS

Do you agree?:

People are drowning in a sea of moral relativism.

Relativism destroys the conscience. Ultimately,
relativism is self-centred, egoistic and hypocritical.
"Doing our own thing is fine for us, but we dont want
others to be relativists. We expect them to treat us
according to an accepted moral standard. (Koukl,
2009)

Is it possible to accept LTA people as one culture

and set standards for this culture?

TESTING AND POWER

Messicks validity framework: locating testing

with values shows its relation to politics

All language testing is potentially political; it can

be associated with power and control
(McNamara, 2005). Do you agree?

For Shohamy, there are two main sources of

power
i) their possible detrimental effects on test takers

One

single test can shape the future of someone

(create opportunities or close doors)

ii) their use as disciplinary tools

Testers

hold the power (deciding what and how to

test)
Test takers can do everything to succeed in tests
(changing their behaviours to meet the demands of
the test)

What about policy makers? What is their role in

this process?
Tests give policy makers a strong authoritative
power
E.g.

High cutting scores can be used as a gatekeeping mechanism (only few people will pass)

Symbolic power of tests on social life

Acceptance

to higher education institutions

Acceptance to citizenship
Peoples perceptions on the importance of tests even at early ages

Then, we can say that tests have power on

individuals
programs

institutions
nations....

Is it possible to stop this?

For Shohamy, critical language testing can help: test takers
should have the right to question the test itself, its value
and its methods.

For Foucault (Fulcher and Davidson, 2007: 144)

all

exams are symbols of power and control

in education test takers are turned into objects to be
measured and classified
notion of knowledge is a construct, used by the
powerful to keep the weak under control

What do you think about this?