Cultural diversity is a notion that has always provoked a clash of opinions. It is worth noting that the postulates and norms of the culture that people belong to are relative and have no general validity. In order to understand the behavior or customs of other people, it is crucial to understand whether their behavior is traditional for their own culture. In anthropology, this methodological approach is called cultural relativism, and it presumes that the culture of any nation should be understood within the context of its own values and considered in its entirety despite the ideological differences that may arise.
The main thrust of cultural relativism is the recognition of the equality of cultural values created and attained by different people. According to this approach, there are no inferior cultures, they are unique in their own way, and are not subject to a comparison (Caduff, 2011). In other words, all cultures are of equal value, but the value of specialties within every paradigm should be assessed within the specific culture. Thus, cultural relativism recognizes the sovereignty of every culture. The principle of cultural relativism plays a significant role in intercultural communication as well, as it requires a sense of respect and tolerance towards the norms, values, and behaviors of foreign cultures (Caduff, 2011). Boas claimed that any cultural element should be considered only within the whole cultural context (“Boas, culture,” n.d.). He explained that culture is a system that bears a plurality of coherent, internally connected aspects. Consequently, the derivation of a cultural element leads to its reinterpretation in a different culture and frequently obtains a different meaning.
However, the social world gave relativism rather a polar value. The attitude, which implies that “your way of doing things is the best way, and in a more extreme form, that your own group is the standard by which the entire world should be judged” is called ethnocentrism (“Boas, culture,” n.d., p. 38). Many anthropologists came across the issue when relativism turned into ethnocentrism. Numerous research organizations, conducted by anthropologists from different countries, claim that people tend to overestimate their own organizations and thus underestimate all the others. The disclosure of the meanings and values of other cultural events frequently takes place in accordance with the standards and norms of people’s individual culture. In common understanding, people tend to consider their own cultural values better and more understandable. Such an approach is natural, although the same phenomenon may have a completely different meaning in various cultures. This, in turn, means that culture is not subject to any absolute criteria. One of the main challenges is to separate assessment from cognitive interest. The basis of cultural relativism is the assertion that the members of a social group do not understand the motives and values of other groups if they analyze the motives and values from within the prism of their own culture.
It is worth mentioning that the psychological adjustment within any given culture leads to the fact that the culture includes both rational and irrational elements such as various rituals, legends, and elements of ideology. The presence of irrational adaptive elements has been recognized in anthropology; however, they are considered as an integral part of the cultural heritage and identification rather than true psychological adaptation (Diah, Hossain, Mustari & Ramli, 2014). As in the case of Hijras of India, completely irrational elements of beliefs and behavior of members of the socio-cultural system, in fact, contribute to meeting the needs of the natural environment of people (Nanda, 1999). Apart from that, ethnocentrism may appear to a greater or lesser extent depending on a particular culture (Diah, Hossain, Mustari & Ramli, 2014). The members of collectivist cultures are more ethnocentric than compared to the members of individualistic cultures. Social background, as well as the degree of conservatism or tolerance which is different for every culture, influences the system of social relations and the state of interethnic relations within a society.
Summing up, the value and the importance of various cultural attributes should be considered in the context of a particular culture. People should have a sense of pride in the culture of their society and express commitment to postulates of their culture, while being able to understand and accept others and their behavioral patterns. Every culture is unique, and it should be assessed according to its specific regulations. However, relativism raises the issue of whether some norms may be referred to as a normal expression of cultural diversity or not. For instance, in several modern Eastern societies, women still do not possess the same rights as men, and the rightful issue of inequality may be raised at this point. Nevertheless, the resolution to the issue lies in the core intellectual substance of relativism, which states that cultures are not to be assessed but understood in their own cultural context. Understanding the meaning of a custom does not imply approval or adoption of it, whereas rejecting the diversity makes the understanding of other cultures impossible.
References
Boas, culture, and the personal in social research and ethnography. (n.d.). Study Guide.
Caduff, C. (2011). Anthropology’s ethics: Moral positionalism, cultural relativism, and critical analysis. Anthropological Theory, 11(4), 465-480.
Diah, N. M., Hossain, D. M., Mustari, S., & Ramli, N. S. (2014). An overview of the anthropological theories. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 4(10): 155-164.
Nanda, S. (1999). Neither man nor woman: Hijras of India. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing.