Editing Morality (section)

===Comparing cultures===
Peterson and Seligman<ref>Peterson, Christopher, and Martin E. P. Seligman. ''Character Strengths and Virtues''. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004.</ref> approach the anthropological view looking across cultures, geo-cultural areas and across millennia. They conclude that certain virtues have prevailed in all cultures they examined. The major virtues they identified include ''wisdom / knowledge; courage; [[Humanity (virtue)|humanity]]; justice; temperance; and transcendence''. Each of these include several divisions. For instance ''humanity'' includes ''[[love]]'', ''[[kindness]]'', and ''social intelligence''.

Still, others theorize that morality is not always absolute, contending that moral issues often differ along cultural lines. A 2014 PEW research study among several nations illuminates significant cultural differences among issues commonly related to morality, including divorce, extramarital affairs, homosexuality, gambling, abortion, alcohol use, contraceptive use, and premarital sex. Each of the 40 countries in this study has a range of percentages according to what percentage of each country believes the common moral issues are acceptable, unacceptable, or not moral issues at all. Each percentage regarding the significance of the moral issue varies greatly on the culture in which the moral issue is presented.<ref>{{cite web |website=PewResearch.org |url=http://www.pewglobal.org/2014/04/15/global-morality/table/alcohol-use/ |title=Global Views on Morality|date=15 April 2014 }}</ref>

Advocates of a theory known as moral relativism subscribe to the notion that moral virtues are right or wrong only within the context of a certain standpoint (e.g., cultural community). In other words, what is morally acceptable in one culture may be taboo in another. They further contend that no moral virtue can objectively be proven right or wrong<ref>(Westacott, https://www.iep.utm.edu/moral-re/#SH2g).</ref> Critics of moral relativism point to historical atrocities such as infanticide, slavery, or genocide as counter arguments, noting the difficulty in accepting these actions simply through cultural lenses.

[[Fons Trompenaars]], author of ''Did the Pedestrian Die?'', tested members of different cultures with various [[moral dilemma]]s. One of these was whether the driver of a car would have his friend, a passenger riding in the car, lie in order to protect the driver from the consequences of driving too fast and hitting a pedestrian. Trompenaars found that different cultures had quite different expectations, from none to definite.<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=BAYKAQAAMAAJ|title=Did the Pedestrian Die: Insights from the World's Greatest Culture!|last=Trompenaars|first=Fons|date=2003|publisher=Wiley|isbn=978-1841124360|language=en}}</ref>

Anthropologists from Oxford's Institute of Cognitive & Evolutionary Anthropology (part of the School of Anthropology & Museum Ethnography) analysed ethnographic accounts of ethics from 60 societies, comprising over 600,000 words from over 600 sources and discovered what they believe to be seven universal moral rules: help your family, help your group, return favours, be brave, defer to superiors, divide resources fairly, and respect others' property.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Curry |first1=Oliver Scott |last2=Mullins |first2=Daniel Austin |last3=Whitehouse |first3=Harvey |title=Is It Good to Cooperate? Testing the Theory of Morality-as-Cooperation in 60 Societies |journal=[[Current Anthropology]] |date=2019 |volume=60 |issue=1 |pages=47–69 |doi=10.1086/701478|s2cid=150324056 |url=https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:8dd8d82d-3829-4857-bcf4-eebf196d11be }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title=Seven moral rules found all around the world {{!}} University of Oxford |url=https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2019-02-11-seven-moral-rules-found-all-around-world |work=www.ox.ac.uk |date=11 February 2019 |language=en}}</ref>