Cultural Relativism, By Kenneth Windschuttle

Historiography has undergone many debates that stress and analyze historical writing in different ways. Over the years, three main approaches have been highly used. These are presented through the works of E.H. Carr, Paul Cohen, and Keith Windschuttle. By analyzing the issue of cultural relativism, I would have to identify with the approach presented by Kenneth Windschuttle.

The issue of cultural relativism has presented a change in understanding the identity of culture. What began as an intellectual critique of outdated Western thought has transformed into political justification for tribalism. By having these tribal cultures represent the only government embodiment in these areas, bloodshed has skyrocketed in a big way in the world today. This change led to cultural exclusiveness that had racial undertones. These cultures did not have equal knowledge and ability, so by turning towards tribalism the narrative that mattered would be deprived of allowing for a genuine knowledge of our past.

The approach taken towards historiography, with regards to cultural relativism, would take into consideration a variety of sources. These sources would require both Western and non-popular Western sources. Non-western in the sense that evidence that would contribute accurately to all the sides of cultural identity as well as the

First, the cause for bloodshed could have been for any reason. Whether it be war, economic struggle and hardships, etc. there is no assumption that the direct cause of bloodshed throughout the tribal cultures of today was due to this sole governance. Second, the cause that deprived the genuine understanding of our past could be deprived from something besides and/or including knowledge and ability. Third, sources taken from throughout history. If this new type of cultural relativism prevented genuine knowledge of the past, that would make acquiring such historical evidence