This excellent excerpt from the Guild Review blog :"Benedict warns that cultural eclecticism "easily yields to a relativism that does not serve true intercultural dialogue; on the social plane, cultural relativism has the effect that cultural groups coexist side by side, but remain separate, with no authentic dialogue and therefore no true integration." Superficial cultural dialogue says, "I eat X for breakfast; you eat Y? How interesting..." But more profound cultural dialogue considers the way in which various elements of a culture interact with one another and the functions they fulfill in society. True cultural dialogue must consider cultures as a whole and ask about their end. Put another way, authentic cultural dialogue must look beyond the mere elements of a culture and even beyond culture itself, to that outside culture, the philosophic and theological truths it supports.
But relativism says that there is no truth, or at least that all claims to the truth are equal. Thus, relativism stymies authentic cultural dialogue by preventing any consideration of what cultures really mean or the ends which they truly serve."
I Like Benedict's analysis in that he goes beyond the basis for the need to put cultures side by side for analysis of there differences from a relativist point of view but contends further that what do these cultures really mean to these particular societies and what are there resulting ends ? This point need to be brought to the forefront of further discussions in my opinion because it is easier now to distinguish between cultural relativism and human rights., but now we need to distinguish what are the real meanings of the cultures practices and the results of them and and there true meanings..........?
William
Oh and lets not forget how then are we going to relate this to human rights?
2 comments:
This excellent excerpt from the Guild Review blog :"Benedict warns that cultural eclecticism "easily yields to a relativism that does not serve true intercultural dialogue; on the social plane, cultural relativism has the effect that cultural groups coexist side by side, but remain separate, with no authentic dialogue and therefore no true integration." Superficial cultural dialogue says, "I eat X for breakfast; you eat Y? How interesting..." But more profound cultural dialogue considers the way in which various elements of a culture interact with one another and the functions they fulfill in society. True cultural dialogue must consider cultures as a whole and ask about their end. Put another way, authentic cultural dialogue must look beyond the mere elements of a culture and even beyond culture itself, to that outside culture, the philosophic and theological truths it supports.
But relativism says that there is no truth, or at least that all claims to the truth are equal. Thus, relativism stymies authentic cultural dialogue by preventing any consideration of what cultures really mean or the ends which they truly serve."
I Like Benedict's analysis in that he goes beyond the basis for the need to put cultures side by side for analysis of there differences from a relativist point of view but contends further that what do these cultures really mean to these particular societies and what are there resulting ends ? This point need to be brought to the forefront of further discussions in my opinion because it is easier now to distinguish between cultural relativism and human rights., but now we need to distinguish what are the real meanings of the cultures practices and the results of them and and there true meanings..........?
William
Oh and lets not forget how then are we going to relate this to human rights?
Dear Readers,
EVEN THOUGH MY BLOG SITE IS INDICATING THERE ARE NO COMMENTS ON THE ARTICLES I HAVE POSTED, PLEASE DO NOT FORGET TO CLICK ON
LINKS TO POST
FOR EACH ARTICLE TO READ MY COMMENTARY ON THE VARIOUS ARTICLES THAT I POST FOR ANALYSIS AND COMMENTARY FOR YOUR COMMENTS AND REVIEWS.. THANKS!!!
WILLIAM
Post a Comment