Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The importance of cultural relativism
The importance of cultural relativism
The importance of moral relativism
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The importance of cultural relativism
Assess the merits and pitfalls of cultural relativism in contemporary anthropology.
Cultural relativism is a contentious methodological and theoretical stance in anthropology, which advises that cultures should only be contemplated in their own context. This was conceptualised by Franz Boas (Boas, 1904). It rests on the idea that cultures are formed through the accumulative process of enculturation. Each culture has evolved in its own circumstances, thus it cannot be judged from a different framework (Herskovitz, 1955). The applicability of cultural relativism when it was founded has become divergent to its use today. As the world is becoming increasingly globalised through the spread of universal morality and migration, cultural relativism
…show more content…
Extreme cultural relativism lacks a moral compass (Messer, 1993). In a contemporary Australian context, anthropologist Peter Sutton’s main condemnation of cultural relativism in The Politics of Suffering is that it has enabled the neglect of the most vulnerable members of society. This has eventuated through the omission of anthropologists and government employees to report child abuse in Indigenous communities (Sutton, 2000). As an ethnographer, it is an ethical dilemma whether to critique the people who have kindled a mutual sense of trust, or to try to change their ways by imposing subjective norms of what is just and humane. Yet several contemporary ethnographers have become activists against the very practices they were studying. Nancy Scheper-Hughes is a notable example who was conducting an ethnography on organ trafficking. Scheper-Hughes decided to eschew cultural relativism and reveal her ethnographic findings to the public “so that measures could be taken to correct abuses that were threatening to under- mine transplant medicine as a humane practice”(Scheper-Hughes, 2004). This type of anthropology is referred to as “militant anthropology”, which contradicts moral relativism and cultural relativism to place a sense of universal human rights above the objective documentation of
Cultural relativism was introduced in the U.S. by Frank Boas in 1887 (ibid). This theory postulates that cultures must be understood in terms of the values and ideas of that specific culture; the underlying objective here was to delegitimize notions of ethnocentrism (the belief that one culture may judge another based on their cultural standards) (Miller, 12-3). Though this theory seems to provide a framework to eliminate a discriminatory belief, it would not allow then, for example, people to attack the events that took place in Germany circa 1930s-40s (Miller, 23). Critical cultural relativism avoids this ‘homogenizing trap’
Culture Relativism: putting aside any judgment or beliefs against a culture different from one’s own culture. In the narrators experience he is able to collect his thoughts and understand that their way of life is different from his own and that he must not judge them in order to truly understand them.
Cultural relativism is powerful and unique, ascertaining and appreciating people cultural. Cultural relativism is unique but can be hard to understand, upsetting the views, morals, and outlines of culture from the standpoint of that civilization. When analyzing the hominid culture, it provides the luxury of understanding their philosophy from their viewpoint. Taking in another culture without being basis can be daunting. Anthropologist deliberated cultures by exploiting two methods, the emic perspective, and etic perspective.
After analyzing cultural relativism over the semester, I have come to the conclusion that cultural relativism under anthropological analysis defines every single culture with some aspect of worth as viewed by an individual within that society. Franz Boas, termed the “Father of American Anthropology”, first introduced the concept of cultural relativism. He wanted people to understand the way certain cultures conditioned people to interact with the world around them, which created a necessity to understand the culture being studied. In my words, cultural relativism is the concept that cultures should be viewed from the people among that culture. When studied by anthropologists, cultural relativism is employed to give all cultures an equal
Cultural Relativism is a moral theory which states that due to the vastly differing cultural norms held by people across the globe, morality cannot be judged objectively, and must instead be judged subjectively through the lense of an individuals own cultural norms. Because it is obvious that there are many different beliefs that are held by people around the world, cultural relativism can easily be seen as answer to the question of how to accurately and fairly judge the cultural morality of others, by not doing so at all. However Cultural Relativism is a lazy way to avoid the difficult task of evaluating one’s own values and weighing them against the values of other cultures. Many Cultural Relativist might abstain from making moral judgments about other cultures based on an assumed lack of understanding of other cultures, but I would argue that they do no favors to the cultures of others by assuming them to be so firmly ‘other’ that they would be unable to comprehend their moral decisions. Cultural Relativism as a moral theory fails to allow for critical thoughts on the nature of morality and encourages the stagnation
Cultural relativism is a theory, which entails what a culture, believes is what is correct for that particular culture, each culture has different views on moral issues. For example, abortion is permissible by American culture and is tolerated by the majority of the culture. While, Catholic culture is against abortion, and is not tolerated by those who belong to the culture. Cultural relativism is a theory a lot of individuals obey when it comes to making moral decisions. What their culture believes is instilled over generations, and frequently has an enormous influence since their families with those cultural beliefs have raised them. With these beliefs, certain cultures have different answers for different moral dilemmas and at times, it is difficult to decide on a specific moral issue because the individual may belong to multiple
The world of anthropology is tightly woven into research of humans and their cultures. One of the most important principles of the Code of Ethics of the American Anthropological Association (AAA) is found in Part III, Section A, Number 1: “Anthropological researchers have primary ethical obligations to the people, species, and materials they study and to the people with whom they work.” (American Anthropological Association, 2009) This main principle helps to guide social scientists through a maze of ethical dilemmas such as if and how the research itself may harm or otherwise impact those with whom they are studying. While the purpose of the research may be to gain knowledge of the plight of a certain individual or group of individuals, by the extension of the sharing of this knowledge the person or persons being studied may draw unwanted attention. By utilizing the Code of Ethics, the framework has been established so that the researcher is guided “to consult actively with...
Rachels, J. (1986). The Challenge of Cultural Relativism. The elements of moral philosophy (pp. 20-36). Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
In explaining Cultural Relativism, it is useful to compare and contrast it with Ethical Relativism. Cultural Relativism is a theory about morality focused on the concept that matters of custom and ethics are not universal in nature but rather are culture specific. Each culture evolves its own unique moral code, separate and apart from any other. Ethical Relativism is also a theory of morality with a view of ethics similarly engaged in understanding how morality comes to be culturally defined. However, the formulation is quite different in that from a wide range of human habits, individual opinions drive the culture toward distinguishing normal “good” habits from abnormal “bad” habits. The takeaway is that both theories share the guiding principle that morality is bounded by culture or society.
Culture Relativism; what is it? Culture Relativism states that we cannot absolute say what is right and what is wrong because it all depends in the society we live in. James Rachels however, does not believe that we cannot absolute know that there is no right and wrong for the mere reason that cultures are different. Rachels as well believes that “certain basic values are common to all cultures.” I agree with Rachels in that culture relativism cannot assure us that there is no knowledge of what is right or wrong. I believe that different cultures must know what is right and what is wrong to do. Cultures are said to be different but if we look at them closely we can actually find that they are not so much different from one’s own culture. Religion for example is a right given to us and that many cultures around the world practices. Of course there are different types of religion but they all are worshipped and practice among the different culture.
Ethnocentrism and cultural relativism are two contrasting terms that are displayed by different people all over the world. Simply put, ethnocentrism is defined as “judging other groups from the perspective of one’s own cultural point of view.” Cultural relativism, on the other hand, is defined as “the view that all beliefs are equally valid and that truth itself is relative, depending on the situation, environment, and individual.” Each of these ideas has found its way into the minds of people worldwide. The difficult part is attempting to understand why an individual portrays one or the other. It is a question that anthropologists have been asking themselves for years.
There are different countries and cultures in the world, and as being claimed by cultural relativists, there is no such thing as “objective truth in morality” (Rachels, 2012). Cultural relativists are the people who believe in the Cultural Ethical Relativism, which declares that different cultures value different thing so common ethical truth does not exist. However, philosopher James Rachels argues against this theory due to its lack of invalidity and soundness. He introduced his Geographical Differences Argument to point out several mistakes in the CER theory. Cultural Ethical Relativism is not totally wrong because it guarantees people not to judge others’ cultures; but, Rachels’ viewpoints make a stronger argument that this theory should not be taken so far even though he does not reject it eventually.
Nearly all of mankind, at one point or another, spends a lot of time focusing on the question of how one can live a good human life. This question is approached in various ways and a variety of perspectives rise as a result. There are various ways to actually seek the necessary elements of a good human life. Some seek it through the reading of classic, contemporary, theological and philosophical texts while others seek it through experiences and lessons passed down from generations. As a result of this, beliefs on what is morally right and wrong, and if they have some impact on human flourishing, are quite debatable and subjective to ones own perspective. This makes determining morally significant practices or activities actually very difficult.
The practices of many cultures are varied from one another, considering we live in a diverse environment. For example, some cultures may be viewed as similar in comparison while others may have significant differences. The concept of Cultural Relativism can be best viewed as our ideas, morals, and decisions being dependent on the individual itself and how we have been culturally influenced. This leads to many conflict in where it prompts us to believe there is no objectivity when it comes to morality. Some questions pertaining to Cultural Relativism may consists of, “Are there universal truths of morality?” “Can we judge
Despite this ever-presence, there are a lot of questions surrounding culture, like what exactly culture, why are their differences in culture and what arises from those differences, and how culture interacts with society to influence one’s worldview. In this essay, these questions were answered. To summarize, culture, loosely defined, is the set of ideas, traditions, and beliefs that shape an individual’s or a group’s behavior and/or outlook on the world (Warf). Different cultures arose from biological, environmental, and geographic differences between humans back when humans were evolving and thereafter. In those differences, many things, both positive like the sharing of ideas, and negative, like the annihilation of a culture, can occur when two cultures meet. Culture can affect one’s worldview in similar ways. It can cause a sort of broadening of the mind, or it can cause stereotypes and even hate crimes. But, no matter what you think about culture, in this diverse, very global society, it is becoming increasingly important to understand what culture is and what one as a citizen, need to keep in