Cultural Relativism, Universalism, and Coexistence
Cultural Relativism vs. Universalism
Key Concepts in Cultural Understanding
Ontological Relativism: There is no absolute and unique reality; the reality that humans access is a human reality.
Epistemological Relativism: Knowledge, truth, and science are “children” of an era, a culture, a particular historical moment. Absolute truth does not exist.
Ethical Relativism: Moral concepts such as goodness, evil, and justice are relative to historical periods, circumstances, and cultures. The existence of concepts is not denied, but the existence of absolute truth is.
Radical Relativism: Denies the existence of all knowledge, all truth, and all ethics. This position is self-contradictory.
Universalism: Asserts absolute claims of truth, knowledge, and ethical values. Universalism is holistic, seeking to extend absolute principles to the entire human race. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights seeks to establish inalienable rights for all human beings. However, the fact that these rights are not universally respected does not mean that universalism defends them as such.
Prominent Thinkers
Marvin Harris: A key figure in cultural materialism, Harris argued that the causes of cultural phenomena are always found in the economic base of each culture. For example, the ban on eating beef in India and other religious rituals are closely tied to the economic conditions of the culture. Economy is understood as a tendency to maximize resources. Cultural relativism interprets this as support for its fundamental thesis because universalism cannot go beyond an alleged animal nature.
Richard Dawkins: Proposes memes as units of cultural information. Like genes, memes are passed from generation to generation through social learning, making it a natural process. Cultural information varies greatly depending on the society, including types of religions. Examples of transmittable cultural elements include ways of dressing, building arches, ideas, and ways of making pottery.
Ethnocentrism and Intercultural Comparison
Microcultures coexist with larger cultures, often with radically different values and customs.
Intercultural Comparison Criteria: Determining whether one culture is superior to another requires a standard. The difficulty is that values must be acultural, i.e., independent of any culture, to make the comparison properly.
Universalist Solution: Relies on the existence of a universal culture, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This declaration provides absolute cultural ideals independent of all cultures.
Relativist Solution: Denies the possibility of such a comparison because it denies the existence of values independent of every culture. However, relativism is also contradictory in saying that everything is relative, including cultural values, since it absolutizes this relativity.
Objective vs. Subjective Values
Objective Values: Values are objective properties of things and actions, and thus universal. When a divergence occurs, someone is wrong. This is the ethnocentric attitude that leads to universalism and, generally, the objective statement of the virtues of one’s own culture over the traits of other cultures.
Subjective Values: Values are not inherent in things but are subjective assessments, varying from subject to subject. Each culture is the measure of what is right and wrong. All values are subjective and therefore relative. The assessment creates the value.
Case Studies of Cultural Coexistence
Lavapiés (Madrid): Different cultures currently coexist in the Lavapiés neighborhood. This example shows how different cultures can coexist peacefully in the same physical space and collaborate to defend common interests and improve the neighborhood.
France (Assimilation): Foreigners are expected to abandon their roots and adopt French manners. In return, immigrants are offered the possibility of becoming like the rest of the French, although this often does not happen in practice.
England (Pluralism): The integration of immigrants occurs through their group membership and interaction with other minority and majority groups. Equality is not the primary goal, but these groups, organizations, and associations can publicly defend their rights.
Conclusion
Coexistence must be regulated, and the best way to manage cultural differences must be determined. Between the British model, which emphasizes multiculturalism, and the French model, which prefers the assimilation of immigrants into French culture, it is not possible to definitively determine which is most just. However, human rights and respect for other cultures must always be taken into account.