Stand still….. can you feel that? Are you consciously aware that the world is spinning millions of miles per hour and that you are spinning with it? Now imagine if you were on Mars and its spinning at a different speed in a different direction. Looking out at the Earth – would you see it moving? You could easily argue that you are not moving because you do not feel that you are moving. It is the Universe that is spinning around you. Yet, couldn’t the Martian have the same valid argument? Who would be right?
According to Einstein’s theory of relativity (Villareal, 2007), “motion must be defined in terms of a given context, that there is no single underlying frame of reference with regard to which all movement in the universe can be measured.” Understanding cultural relativity in the same context as Einstein’s theory of relativity explains how reality is framed by a particular culture by the context to which it is perceived. It is orderly, static, and framed by a specific point of reference as is a planet on the Universe’s map. For an outsider, the logic may be obscure and unrealistic, but through the culture’s “lens” its logic is reality as prescribed by its worldview. Therefore, it is critical to understand that nothing is absolute. Not only are there divergent points of reference that must be considered, but differences in the perceptual view through the “lens” and how that shapes the values and meanings of any cultural framework are significantly relevant to explaining cultural relativity.
Different cultures assign different meanings to different values that are inherent to their cultural framework. When different cultures share similar meanings it is easy to assume that there is also a shared framework. But suppose Martians speak English? It would be erroneous to assume that simply because we can communicate that we can also interpret their frame of reference as it is specific to their cultural “map” of relativity, or worldview. In order to find a common frame of reference, it is essential that we gain an appreciation of their motivations which can describe how they organize and define their sense of space, and further view the world from the perspective of their given reality.
Although culture has historically and repeatedly been tossed around as a tangible concept, it is intangible in its quintessence as culture is a perception of ourselves, how we see others, and the world around us. How we act and react to these perceptions is what defines culture and distinguishes it as mark of identity. The values and rules that govern the lives of those associated with a particular culture are simply standardized norms imposed by the inquisition of learning the way things “ought to be” in a socialized world.
Socialization however does not necessarily mean civilized and must be understood to imply only a given interactions. The geography of culture is not defined by its absolute location, per se, but reaches out to encompass a society that identifies with the values that grant it distinction. Culture is therefore a learned attribute which derives from a subconscious set of ideals that is imposed by either historical patterns of behavior, or what is expected by a society of the people whom identify themselves as part of it. Essentially, it is a shared behavioral concept of a group which manifests as a complex set of rules, assumption, attitudes, and values.
Socialization however does not necessarily mean civilized and must be understood to imply only a given interactions. The geography of culture is not defined by its absolute location, per se, but reaches out to encompass a society that identifies with the values that grant it distinction. Culture is therefore a learned attribute which derives from a subconscious set of ideals that is imposed by either historical patterns of behavior, or what is expected by a society of the people whom identify themselves as part of it. Essentially, it is a shared behavioral concept of a group which manifests as a complex set of rules, assumption, attitudes, and values.
As we push for globalization and integrate societies, relationships are built that strengthen the ideological and economic bonds between people. However, Huntington is correct in stating that most of our globalization and universalization attempts are Western in nature. Many nation-states strongly oppose Westernized values as they conflict with their cultural values. The “West versus the Rest” is plausible should interactive dialogue fail to be more receptive to ideological and cultural characteristics. For example, if a non-Western country feels compromised, then it is the lack of understanding of its cultural “lens” may very well be the underlying motivator for conflictual relations. However, it is the ideological and economic sources that become tools that serve the means to an end. Neglecting to understand the motivations of diverse cultures that results in miscommunication and conflict will thus satisfy Huntington’s theory."Peace is not something you wish for; It's something you make, Something you do, Something you are, And something you give away ( Robert Fulghum quotes).” However, distinguishing cultural worldviews as separate and non-converging, thus having little relevance, has limited the scope of the human mind in that we have been unable to fully integrate the schools of thought which might allow for a higher sense of identity with ourselves and the world around us. Our mental growth has been hindered through the imposition of limits and self-imposed barriers of what our culture has fashioned.
An open mindset void of prejudice and bias will allow us to discover the world by overcoming these challenges to growth and thus, expand our capacity to embrace the differences in culture. Apprehension of cultural relativity and the diversity of cultural ideals stimulates a process of transformation which will widen our sense of awareness and self-identity, expand our perspective of humanity, and cultivate peace in the inevitable age of multiculturalism and globalization.
Sustainability, the eradication of poverty, tackling environmental degradation and climate change, and countless other global initiatives are futile without first grasping a comprehension and appreciation for cultural diversity, relativity, and our own perceptual lens.
References:
Huntington, S. (1993). The Clash of Civilizations?. Foreign Affairs, 72(3), 22-49. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.
Mazrui, A. (2001). Pretender to Universalism: Western Culture in a Globalizing Age. Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs, 21(1), 11-24. doi:10.1080/13602000120050523.
Carbaugh, Robert (2007). International Economics. Mason, Ohio: The Thompson Corporation
Green, E. (2008, December 9). Summit of the Americas highlights U.S. commitment to hemisphere. America.gov: Engaging the World. Retrieved from http://www.america.gov/.../20081209085736abretnuh9.688967e-02.html
Villareal, C. (2007). Cultural relativity: My world, your world, our world. ETC: A Review of General Semantics, 64(3), 230-234. Retrieved from Humanities International Complete database.
Von Mises, Ludwig (1963). Human Action. Yale University, Chicago: Henry Regnery Company
20 comments:
I find many multicultural pluralities in the United States with immigrants unprepared. "There is a central American culture that goes beyond our legal institutions. America was founded with liberal institutions, but it is the sectarian nature of American Protestantism that set the cultural tone" (Manhattan Institute and Pacific Research Institute, 1994). "Newcomers fare at picking up on this tone is the focus of much anxiety among Americans who look askance at the immigration influx from places such as Latin America and the Caribbean" (Senate Judiciary hearing, op. cit.).
As an observation of my own in working with immigrants and the chatter among public opinion, the consensus holds to the lack of unfamiliarity of traditions and customs from either demographic audience. With unfamiliarity of social and cultural expectations rampant among those with a traditional understanding, the sense is a lack of respect and honor for unknown cultures and thier representation trying to find a niche in a new land.
References:
Manhattan Institute and Pacific Research Institute (1994) Strangers at our gate: Immigration in the 1990s, p. 76.
Senate Judiciary hearing, op cit.
Thanks for reading and providing such an articulated response! Immigration is at the forefront of the issues that I want to discuss, but I found it pertinent that people understand the "worldview" of immigrants and the factors that drove them to migrate prior to discussion on this topic. You are so correct in that there is a lack of respect and understanding. This sort of "empathetic failure" can have horrible consequences for the immigrants who have had to leave there country too often due to extreme and intolerable circumstances.
Thanks for your feedback!
A wonderful piece! Many thanks for sharing this. I also find it extremely useful to understand C G Jung's works around "shadow" related to nations / cultures which is insightful in understanding issues underlying cultural conflict.
You consistently write with a presence of mind which makes reading your work a constructive pursuit.
I am of the school of thought which believes scientific theories are usually not accepted into the public mind until they are 'bastardized' into some rationalization of social theory. That is Newtonian Social Order, Social Darwinism, Social Relativity, et al. It removes Modernism and Scientific Review from the discussion and drags it back into the Age of Romanticism with often the same results.
I would also like to turn your attention to Chapter One of of Debord's work, The Society of the Spectacle.
http://www.bopsecrets.org/images/sos.pdf
He basically argues that:
"Behind the glitter of spectacular distractions, a tendency toward banalization dominates modern society the world over, even where the more advanced forms of commodity consumption have seemingly multiplied the variety of roles and objects to choose from. The vestiges of religion and of the family (the latter is still the primary mechanism for transferring class power from one generation to the next), along with the vestiges of moral repression imposed by those two institutions, can be blended with ostentatious pretensions of worldly gratification precisely because life in this particular world remains repressive and offers nothing but pseudo-gratifications. Complacent acceptance of the status quo may also coexist with purely spectacular rebelliousness — dissatisfaction itself becomes a commodity as soon as the economy of abundance develops the capacity to process that particular raw material."
In short, until all social ideas and norms are banalized and brought to market (both inert to society but gainful to economics), then society will not be allowed to "buy into" something the "spectacle" can not blindly manufacture and call its own.
Culture, multi-culture, multi-cultural with Splenda(R)? Not likely, he might argue, until the spectacle in society "renounces all autonomous qualities in order to identify..the general law of obedience to the succession of things."
In short, Debord believes this "spectacle" of Society embraces people as long as it leads to the alienation of 'self' and of 'community', as a necessary means to expand the mass production of 'things' for its own sake.
What we are led to believe is we have multi-culturalism when in fact
what we are offered is the ability for everyone to buy the same Gap(R) jeans before shutting ourselves off from everyone again save for the fact we all listen to the same reflux heard on FM radio in our car back to our gated community.
Regards,
Lloyd Wedes, MLS
http://lbwedes.wordpress.com
Thank you for sharing this beautiful text! Cultural diversity hence is a fact and brings risks and (given the people in scope and their shared missions / visions) critical success factors. I believe you describe this platform very well. Proceeding to the natural follow-on questions such as a- is this a problem? b - opportunity? c - how do I manage conflicting perspectives related to cultural diversity ... I believe it is imperative to discuss this case by case as "it depends" and "everythigs is relative". That "relative to what" is the shared vision which leads us into conflict management or generating benefits from diversity. Our solutions are doomed to never be universal. It's a very exciting introduction to conflict management and I am sure you will find synergies along game theory and mathematical models to support your approach and thinking. Sven Hultin
*** This a perspective of a reader from another country and is important to note, as it highlights the significance of stepping out of our cultural bubble and being more accepting of other cultures if the United States wants to retain its credibility (or get it back for that matter):
"Political statements are basically saying " I don't know what I am talking about but I will sound as if I do know what I am talking about".
One reason why politicians are disconnected from the rest of society.
A leader is in a sense a ' goefer', go for this go for that.
A President who spends his time amongst the poor facilitating for their needs is
a leader.
On culture relativity, do you have a culture other than materialism and consumerism.
As I see it, and I am not alone in this, is that your money rich cater for themselves and disregard the poor.
The poor are being robbed to support the rich.
The USA is perceived as using its military might to get its own way.
I have given you how the USA is perceived by the outside world.
Basically, the USA is seen as the institution of corporate greed amongst other things."
--The respondent will remain anonymous----
Mr. Fausti,
I'm glad you brought up Latin America, because due to high crime and drug activity America (public) has frowned on their immigration without considering their circumstance.
At the 2009 Summit of the Americas, the need for a partnership with mutual responsibility and respect was acknowledged amongst the leaders of Latin America and the United States. “Securing Our Citizens’ Future by Promoting Human Prosperity, Energy, Security, and Environmental Sustainability” was the theme of the Summit (“President”, 2009). In other words, Latin America is no longer in our back yard as the old rhetoric hails, but rather is our neighbor in a post-Cold War world. However, in spite of a shared perspective, it is important to differentiate between proximal relations and cultural relativity.
This visualization of cultural relativity is extremely important when working with individuals from Latin American state’s that have been dependent on the illegal drug trade as a primary source of revenue. In countries such as Bolivia, Columbia, Ecuador, and others poverty is abound and starvation has claimed the lives of many. It is the personal experience of this acute situation that has driven man to seek ways in which to fulfill their basic needs. The drug trade is a lucrative business that can provide for them, their families, their friends, communities, and country. Is the legality even questioned in the pursuit of survival? Yes, they are aware of the consequences but see it as the only rational option. International norms may have an alternative view, but in the mind of the individual and the family at stake, starvation and lack of shelter is not an option. Therefore, they are left with two choices: immigration or participation in unethical behavior.
Thanks for your contribution Mr. Fausti!
Lloyd,
Thanks for your contribution to this discussion and I am certainly going to take advantage of utilizing the link you provided.
Your comment: "I am of the school of thought which believes scientific theories are usually not accepted into the public mind until they are 'bastardized' into some rationalization of social theory" is useful as I think it reiterates the pursuit of self-gratification and as a result, reconfirms realism which has dominated the political agenda (of the world) and is likely to not dissepate, unless of course their is some given advantage (i.e. Supranationalism). This also is supported by the argument ""spectacle" of Society embraces people as long as it leads to the alienation of 'self' and of 'community', as a necessary means to expand the mass production of 'things' for its own sake." I'm definitely going to read this article and am glad that you chose to contribute this particular piece. Thanks again,
Sven,
First, thank you for your generous complements! Cultural relativity is certainly related to how we approach Game Theory and conflict resolution. This discussion is so broad, however, that it penetrates individual, group, business, governments, and non-governmental associations. Diversity is in our backyard, literally. It is within our own micro-cultures and expands throughout the macro-culture as well as the "world citizen." There are so many future discussions that I have planned (yet have been urged to slow it down a bit), but I realized that it is impossible to address these issues without first addressing the worldview that makes these issues (i.e. conflict) appear in the first place.
Thanks again for your input!
Who's right and who's wrong? It's all relevant, isn't it? One thing is wrong in Saudi but right in Sweden and vice versa. We have to be flexible and tolerant in this multi cultural world of ours. And, not to forget, adaptable.
Catarina,
Tolerance and Adaptable -- These are critical in any interaction regarding diversity. Your comment is right on target. Thanks for bringing of these very important components!
E=MC "squared" was a Quantum Mechanical term but what was interesting is that a single event in the Planck scale (so very small) could "cascade" and become a Chain Reaction and so very large. Understanding between two people of different cultures is a beginning of empathy and so the Golden Rule
might be mentioned and understood by both involved with Empathy.
Thanks for your feedback and for reading my post! The fact that you bring up "cascade" and "chain reaction" makes me think how miscommunication/misunderstanding regarding cultural relativity can escalate into a matter of conflict of tremendous scale.
Einstein's T"subset zero" = hv - W This is the 1921 Nobel Prize equation in Physics it was awarded to him in 1922 for the Photoelectric Effect paper of 1905. Thus this event hints at that both Space and Time is relative to the observer. A change in Time may or may not be linked to a change in Space. A Wormhole may be a change of Space, but not of Time. Quantum Entanglement may show that "Superconductor Time Reversal" will be linked to Space or not. I have an International Team considering this for a Space system of system and there is good reasons why it looks like a UFO. The Martians will freak out when Earth invades.
Hi,
since empathy is an attribute for a single person, can you better specify what you mean by "Multi-cultural pluralism". Do you mean that someone is capable to cast the same look to the others independently from the culture or that a multi-cultural environment is favorable to empathy or what ?
Dear "Anonymous:"
Thank you for reading and even more so for responding.
“Perception is strong and sight weak. In strategy it is important to see distant things as if they were close and to take a distanced view of close things (Unknown author).” When using an etic (as a cultural outsider) approach, the criteria are absolute. Although the etic may be an appropriate argument for understanding cultural variances, it fails to explain why these variances occur within that particular group based on their perception. Rather, it assumes a generic perception with different variables of influence. The emic approach can explain the depth of these variances as research is dedicated solely to that culture and conducted at the individual level. The emic approach is more suitable to satisfy the presumption of culture as a perceived image of the world around us, inclusive of the inner workings of our own world, but fails to explain the degree to which our perceptions vary. Therefore, in attempting to understand and engage in effective dialogue, I feel it is important to utilize both methods when dealing with multi-cultural environments, especially when outside of our own cultural encapsulation in order to construct a reciprocal empathy.
However, this essay applies Einstein’s theory of relativity and the correlated formula “e=mc2” to the concept of cultural relativity, where “e=mc2” is explained as “empathy = multi-culturalPLURALISM.” In this regard, pluralism is “squared” as several integrated ethnic groups are not only tolerated but desirable for the betterment of humanity. Presumably, this can only be achieved in a multi-cultural society. However, for a multi-cultural society to be both tolerable and desirable requires an understanding of cultural relativity, where both cognitive and affective empathy are realized. For international relations to evolve, intercultural relations must effect change utilizing the redefined variables of “e=mc2” where all elements are mutually founded on an understanding of cultural relativity.
I am glad that you not only took the time to read the article, but to explore it further with these questions. Especially when speaking of empathy being required by an understanding of perspectives, it is critical that as the author I consider other perspectives to how my article and its message is received. Hence, I highly value your insight and feedback and likewise look forward to future discussions!
Cultures may be relative, but there are some patterns. They evolve according to predictable patterns - the rule of women covering their heads in islam is not something unique to islam for example christianity went through a similar period, and in that period they were also into holy war. It is a common phase that religions and cultures go through.
We need to look at the islamic cultures not as something completely foreign, but as younger children who need some guidance.
In the same way that you cannot make a child grow up suddenly you cannot make a culture suddenly become pluralist and open. But you can help it to go through that stage of religious idealism in a more positive way.
Pluralism is itself a stage that we are now going through as a culture, and I am sure there will be later stages to come.
alexander
Cultures may be relative, but there are some patterns. They evolve according to predictable patterns - the rule of women covering their heads in islam is not something unique to islam for example christianity went through a similar period, and in that period they were also into holy war. It is a common phase that religions and cultures go through.
We need to look at the islamic cultures not as something completely foreign, but as younger children who need some guidance.
In the same way that you cannot make a child grow up suddenly you cannot make a culture suddenly become pluralist and open. But you can help it to go through that stage of religious idealism in a more positive way.
Pluralism is itself a stage that we are now going through as a culture, and I am sure there will be later stages to come.
Eyebright,
I agree that culture is dynamic and as you said 'evolves' over time. However, in the case of Islam you raise a thought provoking concept when you state that we need to look at them as children. The internal conflict and inability to modernize has reduced the Islamic community to the role of a follower as opposed to the leader it once was. It seems as though it has succumb to a process of de-evolution in that regard as the region has become poor, weak, and ignorant as a result of a lack of freedom and internal conflict.
In June, President Obama confronted the Muslim community in Cairo in which he recognized the legacy of the Islamic people. He stated (The White House, 2009):
It was Islam -- at places like Al-Azhar -- that carried the light of learning through so many centuries, paving the way for Europe's Renaissance and Enlightenment. It was innovation in Muslim communities -- -- it was innovation in Muslim communities that developed the order of algebra; our magnetic compass and tools of navigation; our mastery of pens and printing; our understanding of how disease spreads and how it can be healed. Islamic culture has given us majestic arches and soaring spires; timeless poetry and cherished music; elegant calligraphy and places of peaceful contemplation. And throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality.
Yet, it is still so true that they must be treated empatheticly and not forced into pluralism or the ideology of globalization and further modernization. Unfortunately, however as the global community as evolves we are forcing unplausible norms upon these cultures which are hindering their cultural development.
In culture some things are entirely relative, and some things are universal, other things fall into several groups. The thing is to tell which is which.
Same with everything really.
Post a Comment