Cultural Relativism

Introduction
Are there universal truth and absolute objective reality? It would seem that such is not
the case because our exposure and knowledge about the different cultural realities tend to
provide us with ample evidences that there are other ways of thinking, believing and manners
of living. This implies that there is not one single existing culture but different cultures
existing side by side. Cultures of different people each having its own origin, practicing its
own codes and standards and having its own traditions are proofs of such co-existence.

Is there such a thing as universal culture? What is evident is cultural diversity. Cultural
relativism is undeniably present and the best people can do of their differences to mutually
respect one another. People coming from different origins and traditions will have to treat each
other as equals and co-exist in mutual respect and understanding. If such is the case, we need to
understand the implication of living our culture in the midst of other cultures.

In this topic, we will elucidate cultural relativism, its weaknesses and criticisms. The
enlightenment we can derive from the discussion might help us develop a critical attitude not
only toward other cultures but also toward our own culture.

Learning Outcomes
1. Define cultural relativism;
2. Analyze the criticisms and limitations of cultural relativism; and
3. Discover the alternative ways of treating our own culture and others’.

Activating Prior Learning

Define culture in differentiated tasks /activities. Rubrics answer the
question: What is culture through differentiated activities.

Presentation of Contents
What is cultural relativism?
Nowadays, exchanges with and exposures to various cultural practices are not rare.
Modern technology allows people to travel faster and more conveniently that attract more people
to do just that and consequently experience living in another culture. Technology has made
possible what was unimaginable a few decades ago – information explosion. Information has
been made readily available through the internet connection. In terms of exposure,
communication technology has done more than what is needed and essential as we can be
connected to access information about different societies and cultures which make us all the
more deeply aware of the various ways of thinking and valuing different from our own. The
contacts people have with others and exposures to different ways of life have significant
consequences in the way they understand others and themselves. On this basis , people easily
conclude that it is acceptable to be different; it is the same with ethics. This means to say that
what is ethically or morally acceptable or unacceptable is dependent on a particular culture.
This manner of considering what is right or wrong based on cultural standard is known as
cultural relativism (Bulaong Jr. et al., 2018).

Culture has now become the sole basis or morality; what is right or wrong is judged
on the basis of culture and its standards or codes. This implies that what is moral or ethical in
one culture may not be necessarily reflected in another. The rightness and wrongness of an
act or decision is entirely a cultural affair. Hence, something that is morally accepted in one
culture may not be in the case of another culture or what is wrong in another might be
acceptable in another. This is cultural relativism. Morality or ethics depends on the
valuations of each specific culture.

If this is the way how morality should be understood, authorities question whether this is
sound. Rachels (2003) asks whether it is alright that each culture makes its own judgment of
what is right or wrong. But what about if cultural practices in one culture allows genocide to take
place? Should we be silent about the genocide committed by the Nazi Germans to the Jews
during the Second World War? Or, should the excision of women in a particular African culture
which is extremely painful with certain irreversible biological and psychological changes in the
life of the African women be allowed to continue without criticizing the practice? Is there not one
right concept of how should things be? What is the answer?

If it would seem that the mother Eskimos of the north did not feel remorse killing
their baby girls and did it as if it were the most natural thing to do when there were too many
girls in the family, it would be the most shocking discovery in the life of an outsider. It is
total disrespect of human life and dignity and absolutely aberrant manner of treatment for the
innocent and helpless beings. However, much to our amazement, what these Eskimo mothers
were doing was exactly the protection the life of the entire family and their clan. Their
natural and physical environment was such that it was too harsh and unfriendly that people
cannot afford to have more liabilities or more mouth to feed as there was almost nothing to
live on. Should everyone be allowed to live, paradoxically; everyone disappears from the
face of the earth. Baby boys were favoured because they were potential hunters when they
grow up but the girls were definitely liabilities in such kind of extremely unfavourable
geographical conditions.

Why Cultural Relativism is Appealing

1. It gives us the freedom to act in the way we want to act. It means that we need not
adjust in a given situation knowing that there is diversity of valuation.
2. Cultural standards give us a basis for judging the rightness or wrongness of our
own action.

30 |
 3. Cultural relativism allows us to be tolerant of others from other cultures.

Consequences of Cultural Relativism

1. We could no longer say that the customs of other societies are morally inferior to
our own.
2. We could decide the rightness or wrongness of our actions by consulting the
standards of our society.
3. The idea of moral progress is called onto doubt.

Difficulties of Cultural Relativism

Bulaong Jr. et al. (2018) citing James Rachels presents some of the difficulties of
cultural relativism in the following terms:

1. We cannot say that any one moral valuation is the right one?
2. It is no longer possible to render any kind of judgment on the practice of
another society. But what if their practices strongly suggest and call for
criticism. Example, in the case of racism, genocide, etc.
3. It means also that under cultural relativism, we cannot question even our
own culture and the prevailing practices. This means that as if moral
perfection is achieved.
4. Cultural relativism as noted by Bulaong Jr. et al. (2018) can only be
maintained by assuming that there is only a single and fixed culture while
it is increasingly becoming evident that it is difficult to determine what
exactly determines one’s culture.

Why we cannot absolutize Cultural Relativism

1. It is a contradiction in itself. When we insist on cultural relativism, we have made

it absolute, there, it ceases to be.
2. The differences are in our belief system, not in our values. If we look closely at
our values, there are more similarities than differences.
3. Other values tend to be more or less universal, e.g., telling the truth.
4. There are some moral rules that all societies must have in common.

Summary
Cultural relativism is happening. The evidences of cultural diversity are undeniable as
evidenced by the multitude of cultures around the world. People live in many different ways and
that these differences range from being almost similar to being radically different. The purpose of
the study of cultural relativism is not to point out that peoples around the world are different and
as such they will remain different and should be treated differently. And that means also that
other people have nothing to say about others’ ethical standards being different.
That the only way we can deal with each other is by mutual respect which is respecting
the differences that there are in each culture including the existing moral valuations honoured
by each culture.
 Rachels (2003) obviously wants more than simply mutual respect. He believes that
there is something that binds different people better than mere accepting or allowing other
cultural practices without questioning them or that others would do the same. He suggests
that more than mutual respect for the differences he proposes that we should go farther and
recognize that there are more commonalities that bind the people of the world. He believes
that the values behind the practices of different cultures are more important to consider as
they are basically the same.

When he points out that the Callatians practiced the eating of the dead bodies of their
fathers while the Greeks burned them, he actually meant to point that despite the utter
differences in their practices, both were meant to express the same value in quite amazing
differences – that of respect for the dead fathers. If we know more of the values behind our
practices, we can establish the highest form of respect that is based on the inherent similarity
of values found in each of the cultures. Cultural relativism is not the promotion of
antagonism between and among cultures but to seek for the elements that can unite and tie up
harmoniously what seems to be different and separated. This is the best alternative because
deep down the different practices are common universal values. People of different cultures
may have different practices, but remain the same because of the inherent common values
behind and beyond their practices.

Assessment

Short Answer Questions. Answer the questions thoroughly:

1. Explain why cultural relativism is self-contradictory.

2. What makes cultural relativism appealing?
3. Expound: Different practices and traditions from different cultures are closer than
they appear.
4. What is the effect of cultural relativism to moral valuation?
5. Is the idea of cultural identity possible within the context of globalization?

Reflection
What are the universal values found in every culture that can unite the people of
different cultures? Consider honesty or care for the needy. What are the values that you care
about and those that you don’t but you believe people can’t live without?

32