Spotlight on Students: Cultural Relativism versus Ethnocentrism

The following is written by students, Taylor Larkins and Brandi Simmons.  This post highlights their work that they completed as part of their requirements in SA 202: Introduction to Anthropology.  Students were given the opportunity to explore a different culture through two lenses: cultural relativism and ethnocentrism, and through this exercise learn about themselves and the other culture.  Taylor and Brandi were two of several students who were given the opportunity to have their exemplary work featured on the blog.   Please show your appreciation for their work through the comments.

Vietnamese street food. Includes a variety of insects and fried rat.

 

By: Taylor Larkins

            Anthropology is the study of what makes us human (“What Is Anthropology”). One important thing that contributes to what makes us human is culture. Culture can be defined as, “the taken-for-granted notions, rules, moralities, and behaviors within a social group,” (Welsch et al. 10). There are many unique cultures throughout the world, with some being bizarrely different from my American culture. Take Vietnam’s culture for example, and specifically, their food. There are two points of view in which people evaluate these different cultures: ethnocentrism and the cultural relativism. The cultural relativistic view can open up a whole world of appreciation and understanding of different cultures to a person, while the ethnocentric view results in judgment of people who are different, and, in extreme cases, can lead to the destruction of a culture itself.

            The first view of the food that will be discussed is the ethnocentric view, which was my initial reaction. Ethnocentrism is “The assumption that one’s own way of doing things is correct, while dismissing other people’s practices or views as wrong or ignorant,” (Welsch et al. 11). A Facebook post showed an Canadian woman eating a Vietnamese meal of barbequed rat, crickets, and grubs. An example of an ethnocentric interpretation of the cuisine would be my own initial reaction to it. I thought, “Ew, that’s gross! Why would anyone want to eat a rat?” Also, almost all the comments shown in the picture were ethnocentric as well, from people saying they had no desire to visit that country to others saying they would rather starve. One person even called it barbaric. These people clearly thought their food choices were better, and they viewed this unique cuisine as uncivil and disgusting. An ethnocentric Westerner would not think about why these Vietnamese people choose to eat rats and bugs over other foods or wonder what kind of foods were available to these people and what was not. They would not try to understand this culture and would simply believe that their way of life is superior and more civilized to that of the Vietnamese. 

            The second point of view people use when experiencing different cultures is cultural relativism. Cultural relativism is, “The moral and intellectual principle that one should withhold judgment about seemingly strange or exotic beliefs and practices,” (Welsch et al. 12). It is the point of view that anthropologists strive for, because it allows a person to ask important questions about why a group of people do what they do. For example, in the case of the Vietnamese eating rats and bugs, one could ask, “Why do they choose to eat these things?” It turns out there are multiple reasons why. One reason is because people in rural areas and farmers have few other sources of protein, and bugs are full of it. Rats are also high in protein and are regarded as tasting good. Also, these animals are pests to farmers because they will eat their crops if not hunted down (“Rats Back on the Menu in Vietnam”). Eating these things help poor farmers to combat malnutrition, which is a problem in South Asian countries. Through cultural relativism, people can learn to better understand practices that would otherwise seem bizarre.

            As to an analysis of my own reactions to the food, I experienced both ethnocentrism and cultural relativism. My initial reaction was ethnocentric, because all I could think about was how disgusting that food must taste and how I could probably never get myself to eat that, given the chance. But then I started thing about how there must be a reason why they would eat such things. I started to have a more open and cultural relativistic mindset about it and did some research and found out that the Vietnamese have very valid reasons to eat what they do. If the only decent sources of meat and protein I had available were bugs and rats, I would eventually become accustomed to eating that too.

 It is important for anthropologists to keep a culturally relativistic mind because it helps them better understand the different peoples that they work with and keeps them from being judgmental toward customs and beliefs that are different from their own. An ethnocentric mindset causes a person to cast judgment upon unique cultures, which can lead to intolerance, and the belief that their culture is superior to all others, and that people of other cultures should be converted to the ethnocentric person’s culture. This was the case with some early anthropologists, who felt they needed to “save” native peoples from their ways. This intolerance, in extreme cases, has led countries to attempt to wipe out entire ethnicities and cultures. An example of this would be Nazi Germany. Another example would be how in the late 1800s, Americans drove Native Americans into small reservations and forced their children to attend boarding schools in the cities to teach them English and American customs and beliefs.

When it comes to culture, there are two ways a person can evaluate one: the ethnocentric view, and the cultural relativistic. The former is negative and the latter is positive. Through ethnocentrism, a person will judge a culture as inferior and barbaric and will never seek to understand it. Through cultural relativism, we can appreciate and conserve cultures for generations to come.

        

           

Works Cited

“Rats Back on the Menu in Vietnam.” ABC News, ABC News Network, 28 Mar. 2018, abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=81341&page=1.

Welsch, Robert Louis, et al. Anthropology: Asking Questions about Human Origins, Diversity, and    Culture. Oxford University Press, 2017.

“What Is Anthropology?” What Is Anthropology? - Advance Your Career, www.americananthro.org/AdvanceYourCareer/Content.aspx?ItemNumber=2150.

*     *     *

By: Brandi Simmons

There are several thousands of different types of cultures all over the world. No two are the same, and yet they are all so interesting to learn about. There are several ways in which people can react to new cultures, but the two most common ways are called ethnocentrism and cultural relativism. These are two main ways in which people process seeing, hearing, and learning about cultures other than their own. However, they are both very different. Ethnocentrism and cultural relativism are very different from each other, and it is important to know which is the proper way to react to new cultures and new people. 

            The more appropriate way to react to different cultures is through cultural relativism. Cultural relativism is act of being open to new or different things, like different foods, languages, and much more. Cultural Relativism is all about having an open mind and being willing to understand others cultures and practices (Welsch et al. 11-12). Unfortunately, this is not how everyone reacts to new things.

            Ethnocentrism is usually the first reaction of many people to something new. People do this by assuming that their own practices are the only normal way of doing things, and that anything different than their own is incorrect, weird, or wrong (Welsch et al. 11-12). This is done whenever people say that another’s food is “gross” or that their clothes are “strange.”

            Using the cultural relativistic approach to interpret the Vietnamese food one would be being open to the fact they do things differently than we do in America. They may not have the types of animals that we have in America, so they have to use what they do have, which in this case is crickets and rats. I presume that eating rat would be similar to eating squirrel, which is very common at least in Missouri, so I would try the rat. I also like trying different foods from different places so I would definitely try the crickets, as well.

            Using the ethnocentric approach to interpret the Vietnamese food would lead to using negative words about the food and saying things like “that’s gross” or “who would want to eat that” and similar comments. The person would not be open to this culture and would not be considerate of the people of this culture. Using ethnocentrism in any situation is not ideal, but especially when talking about other peoples and cultures.

            There are two different ways to respond to experiencing a new or different culture, ethnocentrically and culturally relativistically. In looking at these pictures of Vietnamese food, my first reaction is that I think about how common it is to eat insects in several other countries, and it is even done in the US. If I were to be somewhere where they had crickets, I would probably try them because I really enjoy trying new things and experiencing other cultures and ways of life. As for the rat, my family quite often eats squirrel for dinner, so I think that the rat would be very comparable to a squirrel. So, in short, I would actually be really excited to try this Vietnamese food in the picture.

Bibliography Page

Welsch, Robert Louis et al. Anthropology. Oxford University Press, 2017, pp.11-12.