sign in sign up
<<
Home , Cultural relativism

Culture, , and Praxis

Volume 1 Number 1 Article 4

January 2002

Cultural , Legal and

Andrew Price California State University, Monterey Bay

Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.csumb.edu/csp

Recommended Citation Price, Andrew (2002) "Cultural Relativism, and Human Rights," , Society, and Praxis: Vol. 1 : No. 1 , Article 4. Available at: https://digitalcommons.csumb.edu/csp/vol1/iss1/4

This Main Theme / Tema Central is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Journals at Digital Commons @ CSUMB. It has been accepted for inclusion in Culture, Society, and Praxis by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ CSUMB. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Price: Cultural Relativism, Legal Anthropology and Human Rights

How has cultural relativism been applied by anthropologists in the study of law and the social contestation on human rights? In this essay the author explores the concept of cultural relativism as a method of cultural description

Cultural Relativism, Legal Anthropology and Human Rights Andrew Price

I am human and nothing human is all moral judgment when observing alien to me. Terence, 163 B.C. another culture, but in many ways this is My own group aside, everything human the ultimate goal of the observer, is alien to me. Renato Rosaldo therefore it would be absurd not to embrace any form or aspect of Cultural relativism claims that there is relativism. ethically, morally, and culturally no Relativism essentially has three absolute truth, and that when observing different levels of theoretical thinking. another culture one must suspend all The first level is Descriptive, or Weak judgments because those judgments are Relativism. This is the most rudimentary inherently ethnocentric (Zechenter, of the three, which simply takes a face 1997). Relativism flourished in the observational approach under the 1930s and 40s with noted premise that every culture is different. anthropologists such as Boas, Benedict The second level is Normative and Herskovitz. It was during this time Relativism or Strong Relativism, a claim that relativism set forth and combined that because are different, two important principles: (1) skepticism standards are culturally bound and there of Western values and (2) tolerance for is no way to set “transcultural” moral other cultural practices (Hatch, 1997). and ethical standards. Finally the third Not all anthropologists embraced this level is Epistemological Relativism or idea, in fact some major players in the Extreme Relativism, which has been field such as Ralph Linton, Robert endorsed and exemplified by Geertz and Redfield, and A.L. Kroeber were quite his followers. Geertz believes that critical of relativism, and to this day “Humans are shaped exclusively by their relativism is a theory to be “…more culture and therefore there exists no often attacked than embraced” (Hatch, unifying cross-cultural human 1997: 371). Hatch claims that relativism characteristics” (Zechenter, 1997: 323). is flawed in its call for humans to be Geertz’s form of relativism states that nonjudgmental in the face of human because all cultures are mutually atrocities like genocide, torture, or exclusive and therefore existent under female genital mutilation, but also independent cultural factors, there is no believes that relativism should not be meaningful way of judging any cultural thrown out all together. Among practice outside of our own. As an anthropologists it can be said that, in observer, Geertz would argue, any type some respects, most are relativists, and of study of another culture, with the in other respects, non-relativists. It is exception of sterile literate difficult for an anthropologist to suspend documentation of exact happenings, is

CS&P Volume 1, Inaugural Issue December 2002

Published by Digital Commons @ CSUMB, 2002 1 Culture, Society, and Praxis, Vol. 1, No. 1 [2002], Art. 4 Culture, Society, & Praxis Cultural Relativism 33

ethnocentric, inaccurate and therefore an is universally accepted within the ideologically tainted practice within the discipline" (1996) of anthropology. As a Social Sciences. method in anthropology, Cultural Cultural Relativism is not without its Relativism presumes equality among flaws. Kluckhohn believed that Cultural cultures and a need for unbiased study to relativism is intellectually irresponsible. fully and more accurately understand If one is to literally act upon the claims cultural phenomena. The general idea is of ethical relativism then one must be so that cultural relativism provides the compelled as to accept any for neutral in happenings as legitimate and justified order to insure that cultures, as Glazer through the claim and sanctity of culture puts it, are to be judged on their own difference. For example, Kluckhohn in cultural merits (1996). Boas used the case of Nazism argues under the cultural relativism as new theory of cultural relativism, the world methodological approach to studying must accept such ideals and actions cultures, and initiated the crossover from because to not accept them and pass the comparative method, to the judgment is to be ethnocentric and observational and merit based (anti- ultimately worse than the Nazi rhetoric comparative if you will) method. itself (Zechenter, 1997). Additionally, According to Glazer, to justify his authors such as Allan Bloom have beliefs, Boas described four limitations attacked the theory of cultural relativism. to the comparative method, which are Cultural relativism, says Bloom, has essentially corrected by the created an abundance of Social implementation of cultural relativism: Scientists and students who “are unable and/or unwilling to evaluate cultures” 1. It is impossible to account for (Foster, 1991: 257). This type of similarity in all the types of culture by thinking in the social sciences essentially claiming that they are so because of offers no meaningful answers to the unity of the human mind. 2. The questions that continue to plague the existence like traits in different field, such as the concept and application cultures is not as important as the of human rights to a culturally diverse comparative school claims. 3. Similar global model. Cultural Relativism is not traits may have developed for very only flawed, but it assumes that culture different purposed in differing is a static concept completely unaffected cultures. 4. The view that cultural by change, growth, and technology. differences are of minor importance is Cultural Relativism “…tends to justify baseless. (Glazer, 1996). the dysfunctional beliefs and customs of non-Western cultures while Under the relativist method a social marginalizing nondominant voices scientist would study the traits of a within those ” (Zechenter, 1997: culture in great detail while taking into 327-328). account the culture as a whole and that cultural bleed off of traits into Cultural Relativism as a Method neighboring cultures (Glazer, 1996) must also be taken into account in order Glazer claims that Cultural Relativism to grasp and appreciate culture as an "is a key methodological concept which isolated and independent phenomenon. It

CS&P Volume 1, Inaugural Issue December 2002 https://digitalcommons.csumb.edu/csp/vol1/iss1/4 2 Price: Cultural Relativism, Legal Anthropology and Human Rights 34 Price Culture, Society, & Praxis

was believed by Boas that this binding on the society that recognizes would allow the rights in question (normally the state anthropologists "(1) to understand the or mechanism such as the feud in environmental factors that shape a stateless societies)” (Turner, 1997: 274- culture, (2) to explain the psychological 275). factors that frame the culture, and (3) to Does there always exist an institution explain the history of a local custom" or mechanisms to enforce rights that (Glazer, 1996). Ultimately cultural someone claims to have? Is it legitimate relativism can be viewed as Boas' for anyone to claim anything and have establishment of an inductive his or her views of rights legitimized methodology for anthropology as well as under the sovereignty of Cultural the rest of the social sciences. In using relativism? Turner suggests that there an inductive form of methodology and may be difficulty in claiming that human discarding the comparative method, rights are universal, especially when it is anthropologists would be able to better being applied to non-universal concepts study cultures solely on the merits of the which such as social institutions and accumulated data, and not with a biased States. Social institutions and states are cross cultural comparison. unique happenings that occur in some cultures but not others. Is it possible to The Application of Cultural claim a universal “right” in a non- Relativism To Human Rights Issues universal situation? Applying the Western ideal of rights gets sticky when Perhaps the greatest, or most attempting to apply them to non-western widespread, application of cultural models because of Cultural Relativism relativism is in the area of human rights stepping in and pulling the and the analysis of cross cultural belief card. systems. In the article Human Rights, The origins of human rights are Human Difference: Anthropology’s primarily a Western concept. It has been Contribution to an Emancipatory that has formulated and Cultural Politics, Terence Turner produced the idea that humanness is a discusses the concepts of fundamental possession of the individual in question, human rights and the application of and that this possession of humanness Cultural Relativism to these rights. entitles the individual to rights. Human Rights, Turner claims, is the idea Furthermore, when individuals come that somehow as a person or peoples together, as in the case of a society or there exists an intrinsic and inherent culture, the humanness of the collect right to certain privileges such as the somehow, in the western ideal, merits right to not get tortured, the right to collective rights. Turner questions freedom, or even the right to equal whether or not a universal principle of opportunities. Exactly how or what right is incompatible with Cultural enables a person to claim such concepts Relativism. “For many anthropologists, as being universal does present of course, ‘cultural relativism’ is not a problems. “The ability to make such fully developed theoretical position but, claims is often assumed to imply or rather, a commitment to suspending presuppose the existence of some moral judgment until an attempt can be institutional means of enforcing them, made to understand another culture’s

CS&P Volume 1, Inaugural Issue December 2002

Published by Digital Commons @ CSUMB, 2002 3 Culture, Society, and Praxis, Vol. 1, No. 1 [2002], Art. 4 Culture, Society, & Praxis Cultural Relativism 35

beliefs and practices” (Turner, 1997: arbitration and a global moral order, and 275). a legitimate expression for the peace and Cultural Relativism is nothing more security of individuals worldwide. than a universal claim that presumes that The case for universal human rights is all cultures are one in the same. For this rooted in historically western precedents. to be true it must be proven that all A drafting of these rights for the specific cultures posses the same qualities and implementation of them upon humanity beliefs towards social value of the began in the late 1940s out of the individual, therefore giving inherent aftermath of the Holocaust and personal rights. In addition, scholars proceedings of the Nuremberg trials. The such as Messer discuss the topics of roots for the appeal to universal human Cultural Relativism and Anti- is also an extension of classic Relativism and their applications to western thinking beginning with Greek Universalism. Messer states that there philosophy, Roman law, Judeo-Christian are essentially two reasons that tradition, Reformation humanism, and anthropologists have been opposed to Enlightenment philosophy. This Universalistic claims: (1) Universalist ideology further progresses with claims reject the concept of individual examination of historical documents rights as being universally self-evident. such as the Magna Carta, the United In 1947 the American Anthropological States Declaration of rights, and the Association (AAA) issued a statement of French Declaration of the Rights of Man international human rights saying, and the Citizen (Messer, 1997). “…standards and values are relative to It is worthy of noting that all such the culture from which they derive” thinking and documentation was and is (293). (2) Rejection also comes from a merely a self-serving testament to self- belief that ‘individual rights” are preservation typically put forth by those Western and therefore ethnocentric. in power to further promote their own Some anthropologists also distrust the interests. Such Western thought is also idea of international human rights notably the result of works done by because its implementation creates white land-owning males, and can be instruments of arbitration and a global construed as simply a means to preserve morality, which can over-ride and their heightened standards of living over supercede a cultural community and its the norm population of the time. While values. Anti-cultural Relativists seem to this remains a predominantly western put forth many of the same concerns as fact, there has been other cultural that of the Cultural Relativist. They both philosophy’s disputing such types of argue that modern human rights are cultural promotions of self-interests. distinctly different from all other cultural Asian philosophy has argued that the rights traditions because “specific concept of political rights is non-existent cultural expressions of moral or social and therefore foreign to the traditions of rights, however worthy and protective of the Asian cultures. The focus of Asian human dignity, are not “human” rights. culture has primarily been based on Under this assumption, those who follow subsistence needs rather the civil the Anti-Relativist perspective also liberties of its peoples. Western follow the U.N. human rights legal authorities, historically, have given system as being a legitimate source for precedence to civil and political rights

CS&P Volume 1, Inaugural Issue December 2002 https://digitalcommons.csumb.edu/csp/vol1/iss1/4 4 Price: Cultural Relativism, Legal Anthropology and Human Rights 36 Price Culture, Society, & Praxis

and by and large ignore the cultural which makes the whole. Moore also socio-economic rights of any groups of claims that law can be viewed as a mask people that are not Western. There is a for elitist interests and that “law purports tendency among these policy makers to to be about furthering the general disregard, if not completely throw-out interest, but really serves the cause of the the “…development or collective rights powerful, generally capitalists and as derivative rights that compromise and capitalism” (2001: 96). Furthermore law gut the individual human rights concept” is used as a tool for a rationalist (Messer, 1997: 299). framework within the profession. Moore There is a certain amount of agreement cites law, particularly Western law, as a between the Cultural Relativist and the social concept of “problem-solving”, and Anti-Relativist, they agree that there thus a tool to solve frequently occurring does exist, in cultures, the concept of problems within a given culture (2001), right and wrong. Legal language has and more recently, a problem solving too called for black and white areas in to deal with problems created by cross- human difference and thus helps create a cultural borders. culturally global universal concept of Law is power, and as Laura Nader rights and wrongs. The result is a clearly states throughout her work, to “single universal formulation” (Messer, understand law is to understand how 1997: 312), which dictates and power works. To understand law and elaborates on what is acceptable power, Nader has turned to non-Western universally as the definition of human cultures to explore what she refers to as rights. the “ ‘Harmony of Law’ model, which encapsulates coercive compromise and Anthropology and the Law consensus as a form of behavior Legal anthropology, once just a small modification” (1997: 712). Among the sub-field of anthropology concerned Zapotec Indians, Nader has noticed, a primarily with the study non-Western similarity between their indigenous court legal systems, now encompasses the system and “international negotiation Western, industrial, and transnational settings” (1997). “ I began to understand legal matters. “Its scope includes that the coercive power of legal transnational treaties, legal ideologies had been missed by underpinnings of transnational anthropologists caught up in a romantic commerce, the field of human rights, notion of culture” (Nader, 1997: 712). diasporas and migrants, refugees and Among the Zapotec, Nader has found prisoners and other situations not easily the use of the harmony law model to be captured in the earlier community- unique. Nader notes that the concept of grounded conception of anthropology” harmony law was most likely introduced (Moore, 2001: 95). by the Spanish as a hegemonic tool, but Law, is often perceived to be culturally that they “had began using it as a tool for “tradition-driven”, “however culture is restricting the encroachment of external, simply a label denoting durable customs, superordinate [sic] power” (1997: 213) ideas, values, habits, and practices” thereby turning Harmony law into a (Moore, 2001: 96). Law is not counter-hegemonic tool used to ward necessarily a culture, as some may note against unwanted cross cultural it to be, but rather a part of the package, influences. Nader’s work represents

CS&P Volume 1, Inaugural Issue December 2002

Published by Digital Commons @ CSUMB, 2002 5 Culture, Society, and Praxis, Vol. 1, No. 1 [2002], Art. 4 Culture, Society, & Praxis Cultural Relativism 37

clearly how a culture can use law for a the same power house that frequently two fold purpose; the first being social pulls “call for fairness” cards on others. regulation of community legal problems “Florida, after frying several prisoners in in an attempt to satisfy social harmony, a faulty electric chair, has only and the second being a defense reluctantly turned to other methods of mechanism against outside influence and execution to conform to the U.S. the unwanted reconstructing of the Constitution’s prohibition of ‘cruel and cultural accept values of legal unusual punishment’” (Franck, 2001: community rights. 191-192). He further points out that when many of our western allies claim Law, Cultural Relativist Linked to that it is barbarous to have any Human Rights executions, politicians ask them to mind their own business and respect the way In his article in the Journal of Foreign they deal with citizens – just as the Affairs, Franck discusses, candidly, the Taliban asks. effects, disobedience, and want of These arguments have stemmed from a personal freedom from international common cause among many nations. regulation of laws and human rights The thriving of human rights, postwar, doctrine through cross-cultural has created two elements, dynamic to the examples. issue: globalization and individualization The Taliban, May 2000, who rule most (Franck, 2001). Globalization has of Afghanistan, order a mother of seven created common standards of protections to be stoned to death in front of ecstatic for all peoples in what Franck (2001) men and children, in order to restitute for refers to as a “decentralized” world, her crime of adultery. One-year prior, through monitoring human rights the House of Lords, provided refuge, for violations and requiring compliance two Pakistani women who were accused from cultures not wanting to comply, but of adultery, inside the UK. The reason: simply have their cultural differences Had they stayed in , they were respected. Jamaica is a significant case surely to be at risk of public torture and exemplifying cultures that wish to have possibly stoned to death in the home their belief systems respected. After the (Franck, 2001). In the face of all of this Commission of Experts representing the controversy of forbidding women to ICCPR (International Covenant of Civil access public education, and leave the and Political Rights) chastised Jamaica home unaccompanied, they (the Taliban) for the administration of the death demand to be left alone in their religious penalty (an act the US is continually in beliefs and cultural standards just as the violation of with no reprimanding), average American requests. “ Leaders in “Jamaica responded by withdrawing Kabul insist that they not be judged by from the ICCPR”(Franck, 2001: 1993). the norms of others – especially in the Jamaica’s response was consistent with West” (Franck, 2001: 191). many other countries, “respect our The Taliban are not the only group culture, our unique problems” (Franck, who request the same treatment in the 2001: 193). In addition, most cultures, world arena, and reject such outside which come under scrutiny of the scrutiny. Franck points out that much the ICCPR, see this as an outright attack on same request exist in the United States, there own legal and .

CS&P Volume 1, Inaugural Issue December 2002 https://digitalcommons.csumb.edu/csp/vol1/iss1/4 6 Price: Cultural Relativism, Legal Anthropology and Human Rights 38 Price Culture, Society, & Praxis

While the Western authorities may view observing a culture at face value still the Taliban’s actions as militant, stands today as a standard practice of barbarous, and socially deplorable, the field data gathering. Perhaps the greatest Taliban has a much different contribution of Cultural Relativism, to perspective. They see themselves as the Social Sciences, and the world “guardians of a religion and culture that culture as a whole, is the establishment should be exempted from a “Western” of cultural tolerance and a better attempt system of human rights” (Franck, 2001: at non-ethnocentric cross-cultural 195) and most of all exempt from having observations. to abide by and succumb to international Furthermore, the study of law in laws established by NATO (of which anthropology is unlike legal studies of they are not a member). Again, as any other field. While law may typically Franck has stated, this mimics the same be seen a tradition-driven mechanism by views on international laws and cultures, scholars such as Moore and regulations that the Western cultures Nader have expressed that law is not its have when they violate the ICCPR for own separate culture, but a part of the the sake of cultural and social grand sum of a greater culture, and that preservation of ways, rights and means. the particular culture determines the modifications of law, not the other way. Conclusion The understandings of law, as Nader believes, can come only through an Cultural Relativism, as a theory, method understanding of power and how that and application, possesses a great power works. Cultures use power as a amount of responsibility to the field of two fold tool, the first being , as well as the greater regulation of community legal problems Social Science system. With its theory in an attempt to satisfy social harmony, based upon the assumption that cultures, and the second being a defense and the individuals within those cultures, mechanism against outside influence and possess an inherent right to be sovereign the unwanted reconstructing of the from all judgment from any other culture cultural accept values of legal system, this leaves very little room in the community rights. case for a universal human rights Finally, legal rights and human rights system. But the gaps and unanswered become sticky issues when they are flaws of Relativism continue to plague applied cross culturally. With different arguments in favor of protecting a beliefs systems it is hard enough for legitimate scenario of peoples and different cultures to see eye to eye, but cultures being able to believe and the difficulty in understanding only practice as the wish without increases when all cultures are required, repercussions from a standardized global by law and sanction, to operate under the hierarchy. While many of the teachings same premise. It would seem that even by Anthropologists such as Boas and the West, the primary developers of the Geertz, have been both debunked and ICCPR and human rights doctrine have a thrown out of most major difficult time adhering to its own law Anthropological and Social Science and beliefs, ultimately reverting to the thoughts and practices, Cultural same justifications of the violations: Relativism’s major premise of simply

CS&P Volume 1, Inaugural Issue December 2002

Published by Digital Commons @ CSUMB, 2002 7 Culture, Society, and Praxis, Vol. 1, No. 1 [2002], Art. 4 Culture, Society, & Praxis Cultural Relativism 39

“respect our culture, our unique Moore, S. F., 2001. Certainties undone: problems” (Franck, 2001: 193). Fifty turbulent years of legal anthropology, 1949 – 1999. J. Roy. References Anthrop. Inst. (N.S.) 7: 95 – 116. Nader, L, 2002. The life of the law: Foster, G., 1991, Cultural Relativism Anthropological projects. University and the Theory of Value: The of California Press, Berkeley. Educational Implications. American Nader, L, 1997. Controlling process: Journal of Economics and Tracing the dynamic components of v.50 (3): 257-268. power. Current Anthropology. Franck, T. M. 2001. Are human rights V.38(5): 711 – 737. universal? Foreign Affairs v. 80 no1 Turner, T., 1997, Human Rights, Human (Jan/Feb. 2001) p. 191 – 204. Difference: Anthropology’s Glazer, M., 1996, Cultural Relativism. Contribution to an Emancipatory [Online]. Available at: Cultural Politics. Journal of http://www.panam.edu/faculty/mglazer Anthropological Research v. 53 (3): /Theory/cultural_relativism.htm 273-291. Hatch, E., 1997, The Good Side of Zechenter, E. M., 1997, In the Name of Relativism. Journal of Culture: Cultural Relativism and the Anthropological Research v. 53 (3): Abuse of the Individual. Journal of 371-381. Anthropological Research v. 53 (3): Messer, E., 1997, Pluralist Approaches 319-347. to Human Rights. Journal of Anthropological Research v. 53(3): 293 – 317.

CS&P Volume 1, Inaugural Issue December 2002 https://digitalcommons.csumb.edu/csp/vol1/iss1/4 8