Search

Abstract Kenya's refugee camps have evoked spectacular imaginarles of terrorism and humanitarian crisis. Drawing on everyday discourses and shared knowledges among camp administrators, this article reveals that these geopolitical narratives [...]

Many contemporary moral theorists concern themselves with the question of whether a universal model of ethical reasoning exists. In more political fields that question is of interest as well. Theoretical frameworks are challenged by the practical problems coming from the field of bioethics. Responses tend to fall into the categories of universalist and relativists. An example of a question to be considered is that of female genital mutilation, which is viewed differently from a legal standpoint in different countries and cultures.

An interpretative account of ethics can best explain how a cross-cultural moral disagreement may be rationally resolved. Although some scholars believe that interpretations are irrational, subjective and relative, these accounts provide rational solutions through community's interpretation of its life as a whole and through explaining the good that motivates a person's position in a cultural disagreement. Analysis also show that the cross-cultural nature of a cross-cultural moral disagreement cannot prevent an interpretative account from rational explanations.