Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
the impotantance of cultural relativism
the impotantance 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 impotantance 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 is perfect in its barest form. Even though many peoples have many different beliefs and many of these people believe that their own moral code is the only true one, who can say which is better than another? This is the struggle that cultural relativism sets out to permanently resolve. It seems as if cultural relativism could bring about natural equality among groups of differing beliefs. After all, no one belief can be qualified (attributed) as being superior or better than any other belief. ...
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. Crapo, R. H. 2013, Section 1.1 defines, the Etic perspective that is, an outsider's or observer's alleged "objective" account—creates a model of a culture by using cross-culturally valid categories, which anthropologists
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 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...
The Challenge of Culture Relativism written by James Rachels argues the downsides and upsides to the idea of Cultural Relativism. This is the idea of Cultural Relativism: the principle that an individual human 's beliefs and activities should be understood by others in terms of that individual 's own culture. It was established as axiomatic in anthropological research by Franz Boas in the first few decades of the 20th century and later popularized by his students.
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
We live in a world society that is changing rapidly. It is causing people of various cultures likely to interact with each other. This interaction can be positive or negative depending on respect people have for other cultural groups and the level of sensitivity. These behaviors are directly related to the two very important concept in sociology, which are known as Ethnocentrism and Culture relativism. Negative attitudes toward other ethnic group or cultures can be result of ethnocentrism. On the other hand, positive attitude can be the result of the culture relativism approach. The purpose of the paper is to show why people need to move from ethnocentrism mindset to culture relativism .As America is becoming more and more diversit,we need
Every individual is taught what is right and what is wrong from a young age. It becomes innate of people to know how to react in situations of killings, injuries, sicknesses, and more. Humans have naturally developed a sense of morality, the “beliefs about right and wrong actions and good and bad persons or character,” (Vaughn 123). There are general issues such as genocide, which is deemed immoral by all; however, there are other issues as simple as etiquette, which are seen as right by one culture, but wrong and offense by another. Thus, morals and ethics can vary among regions and cultures known as cultural relativism.
In this paper I will argue that cultural relativism is a weak argument. Cultural relativism is the theory that all ethical and moral claims are relative to culture and custom (Rachels, 56). Pertaining to that definition, I will present the idea that cultural relativism is flawed in the sense that it states that there is no universal standard of moral and ethical values. First, I will suggest that cultural relativism underestimates similarities between cultures. Second, I will use the overestimating differences perspective to explain the importance of understanding context, intention and purpose behind an act. Finally, referring to James Rachels’ “The Challenge of Cultural Relativism” I will solidify my argument further using his theory that
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.
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.
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.
Culture refers to the collection of values, customs, and attitudes of a group of people belonging to certain area, country or a place. It shapes individuals’ habits, knowledge, experiences, and their perspectives. It is important to avoid ethnocentricity since it creates a bias in which, one views their own culture to be superior over other cultures. In the age of globalization, such single-minded bias can prove to be costly as it can lead to undermining positive characteristics of other cultures. This in return can create negative relationship with citizens from other cultures as well as their governments.
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.