Cultural Relativism

According to Pence, Cultural Relativism is the "ethical theory that moral evaluation is rooted in and cannot be separated from the experience, beliefs and behaviors of a particular culture. Hence, that what is wrong in one culture may not be so in another." (Pence 12) As more nations are affected by the growth of western globalization, it is becoming more difficult to understand cultural relativism. Societies are becoming less differentiated, time honored customs are being replaced by modern trends, and a standard code of morals is generally accepted by most people. Although many people are hesitant to accept it, the evolution of this historical intolerance to cultural diversity is what has shaped most modern societies in westernized nations.

A straightforward way to analyze cultural relativism is to look at its place, or lack thereof, in history. Take, for instance, the explorative voyages made by European settlers between the sixteen and eighteen hundreds. The English, French, Spanish and Dutch journeyed to and claimed the unexplored trans-oceanic lands which include modern day North and South America, South Africa, New Zealand and Australia. As it was discovered, in many of these new territories civilization already existed. Algonquian, Aztec, Aborigine, MaoriÐ'...the existence of these peoples was irrelevant, and were universally regarded as savage and uncivilized races. This led the Europeans to assume that their lifestyles were superior technologically, as well as ethically, to the native peoples that they had discovered. The fact that the tribes had established efficient, reliable lifestyles and lived in general harmony with nature was ignored. The primitive, occasionally brutal ceremonies, such as Aztec human sacrifice and cannibalism, shocked the Spanish explorers that witnessed it. In this situation, cultural relativism would have proven to be very useful. The killing of another human being for religious purposes, obviously an unheard of action in Christian Hispanic society, played a significant role in pious Aztec beliefs. The failure of the Spanish to neither tolerate nor accept a culture different from their own eventually led to violence and the destruction of the Aztec civilization.

What is often misunderstood with the concept of cultural relativism is the difference between tolerance and acceptance. Cultural tolerance is to temporarily endure an element of another culture that conflicts with your own. While patiently, respectfully coping with dissimilarities, the underlying morals of your own culture remain that what you are witnessing is wrong. However, after being exposed to a new culture for an extended period of time, people tend to change their regard to certain differences, eventually becoming accepted ones.

Cultural acceptance is the thorough approval of a once-considered morally wrong constituent from another culture. In this case, there are no reminiscent feelings from your personal culture that conflict with these actions. A minor table manner-related example that relates to this topic is the belching and audible slurping while eating. In many Asian cultures it is considered to be complimentary to the meal's host to make these noises, but in the western world they are judged to be very rude and inconsiderate. Having recently spent an extended period of time in China, it was merely humbleness and respect that allowed me to tolerate this behavior with a straight face. However, towards the end of my time there, I had entirely accepted these actions and had to catch myself from repeating them upon returning home.

An often pondered question is whether or not cultural relativism would resolve conflict, both in large and small scales. In minor situations involving small numbers of people, it is likely that the knowledge and ability to tolerate cultural differences would significantly reduce the frustration and misunderstanding that often leads to conflict, both violent and non-violent. A recent example that took place