Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-cphqk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-15T00:36:47.413Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On the Limits of Cultural Relativism as a Debiasing Method

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

David Teira
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

I analyze cultural relativism as a methodological strategy to correct for ethnocentric biases in anthropological fieldwork. I discuss the format debiasing norms may adopt (rules or standards) depending on whether a discipline has a causal or interpretative outlook. Franz Boas and his school advocated for an interpretative approach to ethnographic fieldwork, in which cultural relativism was implemented as a standard (only culturally unbiased reports are admissible) to be interpreted by expert third parties. Legitimate as it may be as a debiasing method, it does not allow anthropologists to adjudicate their debates on biases in their ethnographic record.

Type
Social Sciences
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 88 , Issue 5 , December 2021 , pp. 1079 - 1089
Copyright
Copyright 2021 by the Philosophy of Science Association. All rights reserved.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

†

Ángel Díaz de Rada, Alfredo Francesch, Ian Jarvie, Inkeri Koskinen, and Julie Zahle kindly commented on this manuscript (without endorsing its claims). The research was funded by the Spanish Ministry of Science grant RTI2018-097709-B-I00.

References

Balzer, Marjorie Mandelstam. 1981. “Rituals of Gender Identity: Markers of Siberian Khanty Ethnicity, Status, and Belief.” American Anthropologist 83 (4): 850–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boas, Franz. 1932/1940. “The Aims of Anthropological Research.” In Race, Language and Culture, ed. Boas, Franz, 243–59. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Boas, Franz. 1936/1940. “History and Science in Anthropology: A Reply.” In Race, Language and Culture, ed. Boas, Franz, 305–15. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Boas, Franz, and Benedict, Ruth. 1938. General Anthropology. Boston: Heath.Google Scholar
Brown, Michael F. 2008. “Cultural Relativism 2.0.” Current Anthropology 49 (3): 363–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chalmers, Iain. 2006. “Why Fair Tests Are Needed: A Brief History.” Evidence Based Medicine 11 (3): 67–68.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Child, Alice B., and Child, Irvin L.. 1985. “Biology, Ethnocentrism, and Sex Differences.” American Anthropologist 87 (1): 125–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, William G., and Foin, Theodore C.. 1988. “Equilibrium Unconsidered.” American Anthropologist 90 (4): 973–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foin, Theodore C., and Davis, William G.. 1987. “Equilibrium and Nonequilibrium Models in Ecological Anthropology: An Evaluation of ‘Stability’ in Maring Ecosystems in New Guinea.” American Anthropologist 89 (1): 9–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fon, Vincy, and Parisi, Francesco. 2007. “On the Optimal Specificity of Legal Rules.” Journal of Institutional Economics 3 (2): 147–64.10.1017/S1744137407000653CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fugelsang, J., Stein, C., Green, A., and Dunbar, K.. 2004. “Theory and Data Interactions of the Scientific Mind: Evidence from the Molecular and the Cognitive Laboratory.” Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology 58:132–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hatch, Elvin. 1983. Culture and Morality: The Relativity of Values in Anthropology. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Herskovits, Melville J. 1949. Man and His Works. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
Herskovits, Melville J. 1955/1973. “Cultural Relativism and Cultural Values.” In Cultural Relativism: Perspectives in Cultural Pluralism, 11–34. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
Herskovits, Melville J. 1958/1973. “A Cross-Cultural View of Bias and Values.” In Cultural Relativism: Perspectives in Cultural Pluralism, 97–109. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
Herskovits, Melville J. 1960/1973. “The Humanism in Anthropological Science.” In Cultural Relativism: Perspectives in Cultural Pluralism, 242–63. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
Jarvie, I. C. 1993. “Review Essays: Relativism Yet Again.” Philosophy of the Social Sciences 23 (4): 537–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koskinen, Inkeri. 2019. “Relativism in the Philosophy of Anthropology.” In The Routledge Handbook of Philosophy of Relativism, ed. Kusch, Martin, 45–55. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
LiPuma, Edward. 1988. “Ethnographic Equilibrium.” American Anthropologist 90 (4): 970–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luppi, Barbara, and Parisi, Francesco. 2011. “Rules versus Standards.” In Encyclopedia of Law and Economics, ed. Geest, Gerrit De. Cheltenham: Elgar.Google Scholar
Malinowski, Bronislaw. 1989. A Diary in the Strict Sense of the Term. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Staley, Kent W. 2004. The Evidence for the Top Quark: Objectivity and Bias in Collaborative Experimentation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sterne, Jonathan A. C., et al. 2019. “RoB 2: A Revised Tool for Assessing Risk of Bias in Randomised Trials.” BMJ 366:14898.Google ScholarPubMed
Teira, D. 2016. “Debiasing Methods and the Acceptability of Experimental Outcomes.” Perspectives on Science 24 (6): 722–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turnbull, Colin M. 1972. The Mountain People. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
Weber, Elke U., and Johnson, Eric J.. 2009. “Mindful Judgment and Decision Making.” Annual Review of Psychology 60:53–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilson, Peter J., McCall, Grant, Geddes, W. R., Mark, A. K., Pfeiffer, John E., Boskey, James B., and Turnbull, Colin M.. 1975. “More Thoughts on the Ik and Anthropology [and Reply].” Current Anthropology 16 (3): 343–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zahle, Julie. 2013. “Participant Observation and Objectivity in Anthropology.” In New Challenges to Philosophy of Science, ed. Andersen, H. et al., 365–76. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar