Cultural Relativism

What is cultural relativism? Descriptive vs. normative versions Beneficial effects of cultural relativism Problems with cultural relativism Must we be cultural relativists?

Descriptive vs. Normative Relativism What are they? How are they different?

Descriptive Cultural Relativism Descriptive Cultural Relativism (DCR) is the position that different societies at least appear to have different moral, social, etc. codes of conduct which the members of those societies accept as valid and binding. Understanding a culture means understanding that their practices may differ from one’s own.

Normative Cultural Relativism Normative Cultural Relativism (NCR) is the position that all social rules, guidelines, morals, etc. are ultimately nothing more than expressions of arbitrary cultural preference. In order to know which actions are appropriate, praiseworthy, blameworthy, etc., one must consult one’s own culture. It is impossible genuinely to act in accord with (or understand) standards of cultures of which one is not a part.

Comparing DCR and NCR DCR: Is firmly grounded in empirical support Does not present itself as providing standards of judgment NCR: Lacks positive empirical support Does present itself as providing standards of judgment

Benefits of NCR It is non-dogmatic It relieves us of the “burdens” of judgment. It seems respectful of difference. It seems based on an obvious fact: people(s) do disagree.

Problems with NCR What is a culture? NCR is self-defeating NCR may over-estimate disagreement NCR may not be as respectful as it seems.

What is a culture? How many people are necessary? What defines membership in a culture (as opposed to, say, mere familiarity with a culture)? What about those who belong to multiple “cultures”--how does one know which “culture” to consult in order to find the right standards?

How is NCR self-defeating? P1. It is a consequence of NCR that no one set of morals, standards, etc. is universally true. P2. But NCR itself is a theory that proposes a standard._________ C3: Therefore, according to NCR, NCR itself cannot be universally true.

What about disagreement? Defenders of NCR often point to the fact that there is widespread disagreement between cultures about certain practices. Is disagreement the whole story?

… if one were to offer men to choose out of all the customs in the world such as seemed to them the best, they would examine the whole number, and end by preferring their own; so convinced are they that their own usages far surpass those of all others.[ …] That people have this feeling about their laws may be seen by very many proofs: among others, by the following. Darius, after he had got the kingdom, called into his presence certain Greeks who were at hand, and asked- "What he should pay them to eat the bodies of their fathers when they died?" To which they answered, that there was no sum that would tempt them to do such a thing. He then sent for certain Indians, of the race called Callatians, men who eat their fathers, and asked them, while the Greeks stood by, and knew by the help of an interpreter all that was said - "What he should give them to burn the bodies of their fathers at their decease?" The Indians exclaimed aloud, and bade him forbear such language. Such is men's wont herein; and Pindar was right, in my judgment, when he said, "Law (custom) is the king o'er all." (Herodotus, Histories, Chapter 3)

Was Herodotus right? There are two ways of thinking about this: On the one hand, customs do differ. On the other hand, however, the underlying value being respected is constant. Why emphasize the former over the latter?

Respect: Who are we to judge? One answer: We are members of the same human family. It is our duty to judge and to advise others as we would advise members of our own immediate families.

Another answer: The question is confused. There is a difference between making a judgment and being judgmental.

When making judgments… We base our assessments, as much as possible, on facts and clear reasoning When being judgmental: We rush to judgment without consulting either fact or reasoning--on the basis of prejudice alone.

Which is more respectful? Assuming that understanding someone else is so different from you that it is impossible (and pointless) for you to understand them. Assuming that you can understand them provided that you make the effort necessary to really engage with them and listen to their point of view.

Must we be relativists? No We do not need cultural relativism in order to: Show genuine respect for difference Appreciate both agreement and disagreement between cultures Really learn from those who are different from us In fact, relativism may hold us back from doing these things!

Helpful advice… “Keep an open mind, but not so open that your brain falls out of your head.” --Richard P. Feynman