What (if anything) can social constructionist analyses tell us about cultural relativism and its proper role in determining morality? Answers on a postcard please! (Or in comments, would probably be easier...)
Yikes, that really depends on who you read as Social Constructionist and how you read them, it's the sort of minefield that keeps the wheels of Arts faculties producing papers. It's almost a matter of how CAN'T you read it.
Okay, so a social construction is like a meme or a methodology practiced by a defined group. Cultural relativism is about allowing for people doing certain things as a result of what group they belong to and seeing their actions in such a context. Determining morality in this case probably means allowing people their judgements according to their culture's practices and allowing for their cultural heritage. For instance, not judging Jehovah's witnesses who refuse to take blood transfusions even when they would have their lives saved by it as it is a tenet of their religion and thus, their cultural background, to do so. The implication is there is no one moral code.
Sorry if that doesn't quite fit on a postcard, but it should be short enough. Stupid Arts wank that fails at communicating its point.
Incidentally, you might have to hunt out some reliable sources for deconstructing the bollocks the way I just did, I used wikipedia to get simple definitions I could use, but I imagine you'll need something more formal.
My own visceral response to the phrase "cultural relativism" is as follows and is the product of my own political prejudices:
If the dictator of a developing nation says "human rights are a cultural construct that Eurocentric powers seek to impose on us and we have a right to our own ways" then I have to ask "but do those you imprison and torture embrace those ways also or are they just the ways of your own local entrenched power elite".
In a political context I see cultural relativism as providing an excuse for all sorts of rotten things. Of course many things are culturally determined but some things (e.g. injury and death) are universal and biologically determined. It is important to know how to draw the line and post-modernism just muddies the waters.
Huh? Is 'social constructivism' the thing behind how we shouldn't judge historical figures for being sexist/racist/etc too harshly because that was normal for their time and place? On cultural relativism, I'm with Daniel. How do ALL people in the culture feel about the cultural practice? Ooh, though assuming I've got the definition of social constructivism right, that brings up an interesting point. What about people who are so brainwashed by the culture as to believe that the perpetration of things which aren't good for them are OK? E.g. is it moral to ask a seven year old girl whether she wishes to play with Barbie dolls and read fashion magazines, and take the answer 'yes' at face value, with the knowledge that her culture says that these are appropriate leisure activities for girls, even though there is evidence to suggest that they will warp her body image and make her more likely to get an eating disorder? Hmmm...
Comments 5
Okay, so a social construction is like a meme or a methodology practiced by a defined group. Cultural relativism is about allowing for people doing certain things as a result of what group they belong to and seeing their actions in such a context. Determining morality in this case probably means allowing people their judgements according to their culture's practices and allowing for their cultural heritage. For instance, not judging Jehovah's witnesses who refuse to take blood transfusions even when they would have their lives saved by it as it is a tenet of their religion and thus, their cultural background, to do so. The implication is there is no one moral code.
Sorry if that doesn't quite fit on a postcard, but it should be short enough. Stupid Arts wank that fails at communicating its point.
Reply
Reply
If the dictator of a developing nation says "human rights are a cultural construct that Eurocentric powers seek to impose on us and we have a right to our own ways" then I have to ask "but do those you imprison and torture embrace those ways also or are they just the ways of your own local entrenched power elite".
In a political context I see cultural relativism as providing an excuse for all sorts of rotten things. Of course many things are culturally determined but some things (e.g. injury and death) are universal and biologically determined. It is important to know how to draw the line and post-modernism just muddies the waters.
Reply
On cultural relativism, I'm with Daniel. How do ALL people in the culture feel about the cultural practice? Ooh, though assuming I've got the definition of social constructivism right, that brings up an interesting point. What about people who are so brainwashed by the culture as to believe that the perpetration of things which aren't good for them are OK?
E.g. is it moral to ask a seven year old girl whether she wishes to play with Barbie dolls and read fashion magazines, and take the answer 'yes' at face value, with the knowledge that her culture says that these are appropriate leisure activities for girls, even though there is evidence to suggest that they will warp her body image and make her more likely to get an eating disorder?
Hmmm...
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment