How the answer moves
The flow snapshot — the routes in, the body, the counter-view and the routes out.
Route 1 “caught between” = a deadlock → universalism over-reaches, relativism under-protects
Route 2 each side half-right, half-blind → the debate advances only when their strengths combine
universalism (Kant, dignity, UDHR) → its limit: it carries Western liberal assumptions → cultural relativism (Boas, legitimacy through local context) → its limit: shields FGM / child marriage, becomes an authoritarian cloak → Asian values (Lee Kuan Yew) → Sen’s reply: Asia too diverse, serves power not culture
relativism’s charge of Western hegemony vs the universalist charge that relativism excuses abuse
Route 1 Donnelly’s relative universalism → universal in principle, flexible in application, “culture is not destiny”
Route 2 Gutmann’s deliberation → shared principles applied through dialogue, not by imposing the dominant view
Model answer
Handwritten, in the form it would be written in the examination hall.
Also asked on this head
Rights — 8 questions in the Vault.
- Comment on the multicultural perspective on Rights
- Human Rights are complex and contested social practice that organises relations between individuals, society and the State. Comment.
- Can there be universal conception of human rights? Give your arguments.
How this is taught
The same flow snapshot, built for every head of the syllabus, with the answer written in class.
The first session of Foundation 2027 is published in full.
Six programmes across three levels.