Cultural Relativism vs Cultural Evolution: The Debate on Cultural Progress

As globalisation continues to connect the planet, societies around the world are beginning to interact with one another more than ever before. This increased connectivity has brought up important discussions about cultural relativism and cultural evolution.

What is Cultural Relativism?

Cultural relativism, a concept in anthropology, is the view that each culture has its own unique worldview and that its practices and beliefs should be evaluated in the context of its own culture, not by outsiders. This means that cultural relativists believe that there is no objective standard by which cultures can be compared to one another.

For instance, while Western cultures may view certain practices in other cultures as barbaric, such as female genital mutilation, cultural relativism argues that we should refrain from judging other cultures based on our own values, beliefs, and systems of knowledge.

What is Cultural Evolution?

Cultural evolution, on the other hand, is the view that cultures can be evaluated and compared by using a universal standard of progress. This view argues that certain cultural practices and beliefs are superior to others and that cultures should strive to adopt these better practices and beliefs in order to progress.

The idea of cultural evolution is based on the assumption that some cultural practices are more efficient, rational, or successful than others. For example, Western medicine is often viewed as superior to traditional medicinal practices because it is backed by scientific research.

The Debate on Cultural Progress

The debate on cultural progress revolves around the question of whether cultural relativism or cultural evolution is a better model for understanding and evaluating human cultures. Cultural relativists argue that the use of a universal standard for evaluating cultures ignores the unique historical and cultural contexts in which those cultures developed. They maintain that we cannot judge other cultures based on our own values without understanding the cultural context in which they operate.

Proponents of cultural evolution, on the other hand, believe that cultural relativism can justify any practice or belief, no matter how harmful, simply by arguing that it is “cultural.” They argue that we must have objective standards by which to judge cultural practices and beliefs in order to advance as a global society.

Examples of Cultural Relativism vs Cultural Evolution

The debate on cultural progress can be seen in various cultural practices and beliefs around the world. One such example is the practice of polygamy in certain cultures. While some Western cultures may view polygamy as oppressive to women, cultural relativists would argue that it is a deeply rooted cultural practice that should not be evaluated by outside standards. Cultural evolutionists, on the other hand, may argue that polygamy perpetuates gender inequality and should be abolished to progress as a society.

Another example of this debate can be seen in the field of conservation biology. Certain cultures, such as indigenous communities, may view their relationship with nature as one of interconnectedness and interdependence. Cultural relativists would argue that we cannot judge these practices by Western standards of conservation, which may prioritize the protection of individual species over the relationship between humans and the natural world. Cultural evolutionists, however, may argue that we must use objective standards to evaluate the effectiveness of conservation practices in order to preserve the natural world for future generations.

Conclusion

The debate on cultural progress is an important one, as societies continue to interact and influence each other on a global scale. While cultural relativism and cultural evolution can be seen as opposing views, perhaps a more nuanced position lies in understanding that all cultures have unique histories and contexts, but that we can still use objective standards to evaluate practices and beliefs. Ultimately, it is up to individuals and societies to determine how to balance these competing perspectives in the pursuit of a more just and equitable future.