What is the definition of cultural relativism? Does the concept of cultural relativism promote international understanding, or does it hinder attempts to have international agreements on acceptable social behavior, such as human rights? According to Nancy Bonvillain (2010), the definition of cultural relativism is an approach in anthropology that stresses the importance of analyzing cultures in that culture’s own terms rather than in terms of the culture of the anthropologist. This does not mean, however, that all cultural behavior must be condoned. According to this article on the website by Got Question (2002-2012), “cultural relativism is the view that all beliefs, customs, and ethics are relative to the individual within his own social context”.
On the one hand, "the attack on moral relativism was part of an effort to rearm the West spiritually" for the battle ahead, while "the attack on cognitive relativism aimed at making a clear distinction between the scholarship and science of the Free World and the debased practices of its enemies" (282). In the long run, the opinions should fall beyond the margins of historiography, and therefore the judgment of any work of historiography should not be preset by a conceptual disagreement. Novick's perspective on the objectivity question undoubtedly guided his book. However, his beliefs are unable to create the past. Even the most simple personal beliefs and bias can skew the appearance we see of the
Cultural Relativism, a term used to describe individual’s beliefs that should be accepted in one’s cultural but also can be denied in society. In James Rachels’ essay, “The Challenge of Cultural Relativism”, she brings up varies examples that contradicts with one society’s beliefs to another society. She uses this term and analyzes it different situations proving that it can be controversial at times since no one should have the same thinking process as another person. For example, if you were to take to civilizations of the past and tell them to trade beliefs. They would find it outrages since it would be unorthodox to their teachings.
John Smith Mr. Jones Sociology 212 3 May 2012 Disenchanted The Politics of Experience is collection of theories and ideas about experience, behavior, and sanity. The book is sometimes abstract, mostly controversial, and always bold and thought provoking. Dr. Laing goes to great lengths to prove that not only is the scientific method incapable of measuring the human experience, but our views on normalcy and order within society are both violent and destructive; that normalcy is in fact, insanity. In this world, we are groomed into beings that are increasingly led to believe in the material, or external world. Forsaken are thoughts of imagination, fantasy, and freedom.
synopsis (Included in word count) “The ability to stand outside your own political system and your own culture, to criticise your own society and to pursue the truth is something we today take so much for granted.” - Keith Windschuttle, 2010 The ways in which history is researched, perceived and recorded has changed dramatically over time to reflect the continuous historiographical problems associated with any attempt to uncover the ‘truth’ of the past. This essay will attempt to analyse and explore both sides central to the ‘History Wars’ and shed light on the problems of objectivity, prior political convictions, the role of the academic historian and the proper practice of scholarship
It is a defense of studying each historical period on its own terms, and not imposing one's own moral and social standards on figures and situations that existed with, perhaps, a different set of ethical and cultural concerns. Butterfield’s text described historians who project modern attitudes on to the past, pass moral judgments on historical figures, and regard history as significant only to the extent that it labored to create the modern world. Such judgments are viewed as problematic because they tempt historians not to understand the past on its own terms. Butterfield argues that historians should write aesthetically rather than polemically, exercising "imaginative sympathy" in appreciating the lost worlds of the dead rather than seeking, or expecting, the vindication of their own current positions (92). The "Whig interpretation," as Butterfield calls it, sees history as a struggle between a progression of good libertarian parties and evil reactionary forces, failing to do justice to history's true complexity.
Written Assignment 1 In his lectures, Professor Ambrosio examines the existential question: “What is the meaning of life?” Professor Ambrosio explains that questioning the meaning of life is important, and that the question is more important then the answer. With two metaphors, the hero and the saint, Professor Ambrosio divides society into distinct classifications that one must decipher between. Professor Ambrosio as a philosopher introduces different approaches to how life is viewed, and the types of people in society. With key metaphors that have meaning deeper than on the surface, Professor Ambrosio has introduced a thought-provoking division of everyday society. The first distinction talks about the life of the “hero”.
Wallace also strongly points out that we need to be “a little less arrogant” and not believe solely in our preconceived notions about things, because we usually tend to be wrong. We must be aware of our surroundings and learn how to control how and what we want to think. Wallace says that we get to decide what has meaning and what does not, and we must do this with awareness, an open mind, and give ourselves choices of how to view situations. Bertrand Russell tells readers in “The Problems of Philosophy” that unlike typical sciences where one discovers correct answers, we are constantly searching for the value of philosophy. Russell says that philosophy does not find right answers, but rather encourages thinking.
4) The importance of cultural relativism is that it brings the society to pursue their own desires toward their beliefs, values, and behaviors. The strengths toward cultural relativism are that it helps people try new things and encourage life in a different way. The weaknesses would be that conflict can be involved when speaking about culture. It does not allow any cultural comparisons because it is a product of the people and the environment. Cultural relativism is a product of history and that’s why the society has many different cultural
Humans’ personalities and way of life is greatly influenced by our moral convictions so to have discussion about how humans should live together without taking into consideration what shapes us, is not only a mistake, but it is impossible. Sandel is thus claiming that what current democracy is attempting to do is impossible and causes a paradox which creates unrest within the people. He suggests this is fixed by encouraging open deliberation as a part of the political process. What causes this deliberation to be open is that there is discussion about