Comments on: An obvious thought on cultural relativism

By: Twill00

Twill00 — Sat, 04 Mar 2006 07:32:16 +0000

Veritas -
It hardly matters what the “right” figure might be for a poll when the polled group is so skewed to the left. Heck, why not poll 100% Democrats and get Bush’s numbers into the teens?

Besides, pointing out that a poll is bogus doesn’t imply that Bush is doing a great job – it just points out that the people doing the polling are committing a fraud. Intentional or not, it’s journalistic malpractice.

By: Gary Rosen

Gary Rosen — Thu, 02 Mar 2006 04:31:52 +0000

Ahhh. I understand now, “markus”. Adolf Hitler believed in his principles, Winston Churchill believed in *his* principles, so they were really the same. It all becomes clear now.

By: markus

markus — Wed, 01 Mar 2006 19:59:58 +0000

Steven — if you want to have a discussion, please be clear. I pointed out that radical Islamists also strongly believe in absolute, universal standards of truth. Disagree?

Wikipedia, by the way, appears to have a good entry on cultural relativism, distinquishing it from moral relativism.

from it, a Clyde Kluckhorn quote:
The concept of culture, like any other piece of knowledge, can be abused and misinterpreted. Some fear that the principle of cultural relativity will weaken morality. “If the Bugabuga do it why can’t we? It’s all relative anyway.” But this is exactly what cultural relativity does not mean.
The principle of cultural relativity does not mean that because the members of some savage tribe are allowed to behave in a certain way that this fact gives intellectual warrant for such behavior in all groups. Cultural relativity means, on the contrary, that the appropriateness of any positive or negative custom must be evaluated with regard to how this habit fits with other group habits. Having several wives makes economic sense among herders, not among hunters. While breeding a healthy skepticism as to the eternity of any value prized by a particular people, anthropology does not as a matter of theory deny the existence of moral absolutes. Rather, the use of the comparative method provides a scientific means of discovering such absolutes. If all surviving societies have found it necessary to impose some of the same restrictions upon the behavior of their members, this makes a strong argument that these aspects of the moral code are indispensable.

By: Steven Mitchell

Steven Mitchell — Wed, 01 Mar 2006 18:37:45 +0000

Yeah, markus. If one person has a bad idea, then anything that can be tied to that idea–however illogical, dishonest, and plain silly the ties, is automatically discredited. So goes the basic “logic” of the relativist. Thanks for demonstrating the start of the slippery slope.

By: markus

markus — Wed, 01 Mar 2006 14:20:48 +0000

Don’t forget the other great enemy of “cultural relativism”, your comrades in the struggle against it: the radical Islamists, fighting the good fight against the separation of mosque and state, the idea that some women might prefer not to wear a burkha, and other countless other affronts to God-given natural law.

By: Steven Mitchell

Steven Mitchell — Wed, 01 Mar 2006 14:17:47 +0000

Ugh, mangled the Chesterton quote, even when paraphrasing. Of course it should be: “The man who believes in nothing, will believe anything.”

By: Paul

Paul — Wed, 01 Mar 2006 13:42:11 +0000

The postmodern concept of no objective truth more than anything else makes it easy to lie. To others and to oneself.

Another vote for the Hicks book. Every recovering “liberal” should read it.

By: Steven Mitchell

Steven Mitchell — Wed, 01 Mar 2006 12:30:57 +0000

“So cultural relativism is a great convenience for people who don’t want to bother.”

As others have agreed, this is true. It is not, however, the whole picture. Cultural relativism, same as its moral counterpart, is also a great convenience for people who do very much want to bother–but know that reality is not on their side. That is, the habits of relativism in the populace are great cover for those who want to put a load of hooey over on everyone else. “The man who believes in nothing, with believe anything.”

The “20th century American” (as one of my professers called ‘em) is so mired in the language and habits of relativism, that even those who consciously reject it will find it creeping in unless monitored carefully.

Of course, that really means that cultural relativism isn’t a great convenience at all. It’s actually a terrible impediment, that seems convenient at the time, but always has a price attached.

By: zefal

zefal — Wed, 01 Mar 2006 10:18:28 +0000

I would like to see what areas of the country the people were polled from.

They can slant the poll by what kind of democrats or republicans they survey. They could do this for selfdelusional purposes or believe they can convince people that they are in the minority in supporting Bush and this would have an effect of changing people’s minds. Herd mentality effect.

Does anyone remember when CBS took a poll and it showed favorable to Bush and Dan Rather didn’t report on it on his newscast. But 2 days later another poll on the same thing was done by someone else that showed the opposite and that made his newscast?

The CBS poll was on CBS.com that’s how someone exposed it. Don’t remember what the poll was about.

By: gumshoe

gumshoe — Wed, 01 Mar 2006 05:48:26 +0000

Roger -

I just posted Re: Cultural Relativism
yesterday at YARGB, and referenced a 1988 book
by Allan Bloom “The Closing of the American Mind”

Your initial comments in the post are
almost a direct reflection of that discussion…

Bloom’s book can be conceived as a mid-1980′s
version of “Explaining Post-Modernism” by Stephen R. Hicks…rather prescient,in other words.

I wrote:

“i just recenty pulled this one off my bookshelf for a read…Bloom saw Horowitz’looming brand of University idiocy and the abandonment of the search for truth in the mid 1980′s
(don’t be put off by the title,aside from the title,the book is *not* sensationalist
and is quite rigorus):

“The Closing of the American Mind” Allan Bloom
(Paperback – May 15, 1988)

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/
0671657151/sr=8-2/qid=1140655874/
ref=sr_1_2/103-2478812-
0501453?%5Fencoding=UTF8

Bloom starts off describing how the one moral conviction ALL his students seemed to arrive at the Univ with was “the relativity of truth”…and I believe this is where Bloom’s title derives from:

they were ALL closed to the idea
that there even was such a thing as Truth.

Hence their minds were already closed
to any kind of search/seeking after it.”
____________________________

It’s been my off-line reading for the week,
and it’s not been a disappointment.