Cultural Relativism and the Future of Anthropology

Spiro, Melford E.

doi:10.1525/can.1986.1.3.02a00010

Cited by 141 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For discussions of moral relativism that engage especially with anthropology, see Gellner (1985), Hollis andLukes (1982) Horton (1993), Jarvie (1984) and Wong (1984Wong ( , 2006. For more elaborate discussions of relativism and the history and future of anthropology, see Harris (2001: chs 9-13), Hatch (1983) and Spiro (1992). 11.…”

Section: Pluralism About Relations and The Objectivity Of Kinship Kmentioning

confidence: 99%

Thinking about relations: Strathern, Sahlins, and Locke on anthropological knowledge

Wilson

2016

Anthropological Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

John Locke is known within anthropology primarily for his empiricism, his views of natural laws, and his discussion of the state of nature and the social contract. Marilyn Strathern and Marshall Sahlins, however, have offered distinctive, novel, and broad reflections on the nature of anthropological knowledge that appeal explicitly to a lesser-known aspect of Locke's work: his metaphysical views of relations. This paper examines their distinctive conclusions -Sahlins' about cultural relativism, Strathern's about relatives and kinship -both of which concern the objectivity of anthropological knowledge. Although Locke's own views of relations have been neglected by historians of philosophy in the past, recent and ongoing philosophical discussions of Locke on relations create a productive trading zone between philosophy and anthropology on the objectivity of anthropological knowledge that goes beyond engagement with the particular claims made by Sahlins and Strathern.

show abstract

Section: Pluralism About Relations and The Objectivity Of Kinship Kmentioning

confidence: 99%

Thinking about relations: Strathern, Sahlins, and Locke on anthropological knowledge

Wilson

2016

Anthropological Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Naive universalism has characterized some aspects of contemplative science thus far, as we have seen above in the case of grouping multiple diverse practices and traditions as "mindfulness"; it treats complex terms like "mindfulness," "consciousness," "mind," "compassion," "empathy," and "meditation" as if they required nothing more than a single-sentence definition, or no definition at all, even when investigating across traditions, or even across multiple traditions at the same time. 1 Equally problematic, however, is narrow particularism, characteristic of some research in the humanities and in cultural anthropology, which derives from cultural variability a case for cultural relativism [46]. It is reasonable to ask whether concepts like "compassion" can only be understood when situated fully within a historical, cultural, and religious context, and whether there is an essence to an emotion such as compassion that would mean that karun .ā (the Sanskrit word commonly translated as "compassion") in India 2000 years ago or snying rje (the Tibetan term) 1000 years ago bear a close resemblance to each other as well as to our contemporary understanding of the English word "compassion" in the early 21st century.…”

Section: Compassionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contemplative Science and Secular Ethics

Silva

2016

Religions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article argues that the emerging project of contemplative science will be best served if it is informed by two perspectives. First, attention should be paid not only to non-analytical and/or mindfulness-based practices, but to a fuller range of contemplative practices, including analytical styles of meditation. Second, the issue of ethics must be addressed as a framework within which to understand contemplative practice: both theoretically in order to understand better the practices themselves and the traditions they come from, and practically in order to understand the ways in which contemplative practices are deployed in contemporary societies. The Tibetan Buddhist Lojong (blo sbyong) tradition and secularized practices derived from it, which are now an area of study in contemplative science, are examined as a kind of case study in order to make these two points and illustrate their importance and relevance for the future of this emerging field.

show abstract

“…1952: Hatch, 1983and Spiro, 1986: for additional studies based on this approach, see Friedman, 1989;Helwig. 1989;and Turieletal., 1990.…”

Section: Controversies Involving Moral Definition and Moral Variationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The more traditional interpretation [Williams, 1972;Spiro, 1986;Turiel, 1989] is that Herskovits asserts contradictory propositions. By asserting that the values and beliefs of different cultures are equally valid and cannot be judged from the perspec tive of any single culture, Herskovits com mits himself to what he says cannot be done, namely establishing a judgment that tran scends purported cultural biases.…”

Section: Controversies Involving Moral Variation and Moral Epistemologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Bounding the Controversies: Foundational Issues in the Study of Moral Development

Kahn¹

1991

Human Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

By drawing on four foundational issues in the study of moral development – moral definition, ontogeny, variation, and epistemology – this article offers a means for bounding moral development controversies, in the sense of defining their parameters and clarifying the conflicts. Numerous controversies are examined, to provide a sense of the robustness of the analyses. These controversies include debates between character-education and social-cognitive theorists concerning moral education, claims of gender differences and charges of sex bias in moral development research, differing interpretations of cross-cultural data, tensions embedded in anthropological theories of cultural relativism, and attempts to move from empirical findings to statements of value. In addition, attention is paid to how the four foundational issues can and often should be brought together in moral theory and research.

show abstract

Cultural Relativism and the Future of Anthropology

Cited by 141 publications

References 12 publications

Thinking about relations: Strathern, Sahlins, and Locke on anthropological knowledge

Thinking about relations: Strathern, Sahlins, and Locke on anthropological knowledge

Contemplative Science and Secular Ethics

Bounding the Controversies: Foundational Issues in the Study of Moral Development

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About