The blog question this week presents a very interesting—yet potentially controversial—set of ideas. I think the claim presented in the blog question regarding Todorov's focus on the other rather than on the effects of different cultural practices is profound and is an important distinction to make. So, to offer my own opinion, yes there are some cultural practices that are simply superior to others. This can be easily supported in certain cases such as in arguing that cultures practicing cannibalistic diets, and human sacrifices in modern times can be described as inferior. Beyond that, things start to get a little messy, yet not completely unmanageable.
First off, while it may be possible to collect enough empirical evidence about the effects of certain cultural practices and therefore compare them to each other, any conclusion that could be made would likely call for an extensive amount of knowledge of the totality of the context in which the practice is prevalent. What I mean by this is that it is very impractical to expect to empirically collect data of one cultural practice being "better" or "superior" to another. However, it may be possible to collect empirical evidence to suggest that a certain practice has a positive correlation with human longevity while a different practice has a less strong correlation with it, or something similar to that analysis.
The second thing to consider is whether or not its a good idea to even begin to categorically suggest that cultural practices of others are inferior to one's own. As we all should know, this type of us vs. them or superiority complex has led to the oppression of many groups of people in history and often no good comes of this type of unprovoked, categorical negative assessment of others. This inspires the question: Can an individual practice a certain culture, personally dismissing alternatives, without subordinating those who practice said alternatives?
I believe the answer is yes, these two things can be mutually exclusive. I understand the argument that by conducting oneself in accordance with a certain practice, they inherently dismiss other practices and therefore believe these other practices to be inferior. However, I don't think that this is always true. I believe an individual could conduct themselves in a certain way simply because they are most used to doing things that way and have a deep personal connection to the cultural practices they participate in. Just because I don't celebrate the holiday of Christmas, for example, doesn't mean I have to believe that Christmas is an inferior holiday to Chanukkah. In fact, Christmas is a much more significant holiday to Christians than Chanukah is to Jews—if measuring the holiday by its importance within the respective religious group, Chanukah is clearly the less important one. Nevertheless, Chanukah is the holiday I gladly, joyfully, and meaningfully practice. This isn't to say that I think Christmas is a superior cultural practice, rather the comparison of the two is more like a comparison of apples to oranges and therefore I can practice the holiday while also happily wishing a Merry Christmas to Christians without a conflict of interest. If, for example, I wanted to make the claim that latkes are better tasting than Christmas fruit cake, I could probably garner a lot of support, but this conclusion is yet again a matter of opinion.
Really, what everything boils down to is how strong the opinion of the majority is regarding a specific cultural practice. Let's say there was a winter holiday practiced by some minor religious sect in which at dawn on the day of the annual holiday the members of said sect gathered together, drank a glass of cow milk each, killed and ate five randomly selected community members between the ages of 12-14, and then sang a hymn, we could likely agree as a majority that this holiday is explicitly inferior to both Chanukah and Christmas.
The problematic thing about using the standard baseline of the "opinion of the majority" is that this often changes. At one point in history in the United States, the majority opinion may have been that Chanukah is an inferior holiday because the Jewish people are inferior people. Just like, at one point in history the practice of homosexuality was seen by the majority as inferior to the practice of heterosexuality. In fact, and this one might really mess with everyone's heads, both of these opinions may still be the majority opinion in some places in our country, if not nationally. That's why this question is so hard to answer and why giving an empirical value to the effects of a practice aren't objective. Heck, if the majority of US citizens believe cannibalism was an okay thing to do at some point in the future for some reason, then the idea that it is inhumane or has effects that are detrimental in some way to society could also change.
Objectivity vs. Subjectivity and other philosophical dichotomies or spectrums such as these I am dealing with in relation to this weeks blog question are undoubtedly intriguing to think about and discuss, yet I think the most important thing to take away from this whole exercise is this: treat other cultures and other people with respect, tolerance, and a willingness to learn from them whenever possible. Instead of trying to make a categorical claim about a practice being inferior or superior, make a personal decision about what to do and don't let your own opinion about which practice is right for you allow you to harbor hateful prejudice that affects your interaction with others.
No comments:
Post a Comment