Ethnocentrism vs. Cultural Relativism | Difference & Relationship

Ethan's view was quite popular during the age of exploration and expansion that led to the colonization of the Americas. Colonial powers reasoned that they were taming the savage natives by civilizing them. Even something as innocuous as religion can serve an ethnocentric purpose. Many missionaries honestly believed they were teaching religion to the natives for their own good. Historically, however, such actions often have the net effect of destroying the culture of the natives. Without their own culture, or with it in crisis, the natives have problems organizing resistance to colonial demands for their land and resources. Ethan wouldn't see as much of a problem with this turn of events, as he assumes that his own people would make better use of the land than then natives.

There are issues with Casey's point of view as well. Cultural relativism stems from anthropology and the social sciences. Casey's view is intended as a realistic look at the function of behavior within another culture. This can help professionals, such as anthropologists, look at culture as it interacts with the world. However, there can be a sort of moral relativism implied through cultural relativism. Moral relativism is the idea that there is no right or wrong and that all actions are context-dependent.

It is sometimes difficult for someone like Casey to call some acts wrong. Some cultural institutions, such as female genital mutilation in some Middle Eastern or African countries, have a place in those cultures. That is, these acts serve a purpose in their societies of reassuring people about the place of women in that society. Casey understands that these acts hurt people, but because they have a place in the relevant culture, she has no basis for calling them wrong. This is true even though these acts harm people who often have no say in the matter - in this case, women like Casey. The relativist has no objective standard and, thus, no way to address this type of harm.

As a bit of an afterword, let's just point out that fully-ethnocentric views, like Ethan's, are difficult to find these days. Equally difficult to find is a completely relativistic stance, like Casey's. Our two example characters are only examples, after all. Many of the problems inherent in one of our siblings' world views can be taken care of by either adopting part of the opposing view or making exceptions to their own stance. Ethan could understand that the ways of other people are valid in their own cultures. If so, he could comfortably still conclude that his own way was more correct without belittling others. Casey could take the stance that some acts, though culturally valid, may cause so much harm that they may not have a place in the world.

Lesson Summary

Let's review what we've learned. Ethnocentrism and cultural relativism are two sides of a broader issue dealing with culture. The perspective of ethnocentrism addresses foreign peoples from the standpoint of the superiority of the observer's culture, including values, religion, and symbols. Cultural relativism addresses other people in light of those people's culture. Major issues can arise from ethnocentrism, as people can be dehumanized if their culture is not respected. Issues may also arise from relativism, because some cultures have inequalities and cause harm as part of their traditions and norms. The relativist has no basis to call this harm immoral.