No savage and civilised peoples; only different cultures?

[charlou]

Taken from this thread: Where are you on the Political Compass? ...

I'm just curious ... There are no savage and civilised peoples; there are only different cultures. I disagreed with this statement. What do others think?

So, what do you think?

[Har]

To me that question smacked of cultural relativism, something which I abhor, as it puts the wife-beating, child raping, gay murdering, freedom hating islamist loonies on the same line as compassionate, understanding humanists. I believe some cultures simply are better.

[charlou]

It wasn't a question, but a statement. One I disagree with.

I wonder about the use of the word 'peoples' ... Is it referring to people by race, by culture, or by individual worldview and behaviour?

For me, that makes a difference to whether I agree with it.

I disagree if the word 'peoples' is referring to culture or individals, but agree if it's referring to race.

[eXcommunicate]

I disagreed on the quiz. Not Strongly Disagree, but Disagree. I am a cultural relativist to a point, but at some point some cultures just cross the line into barbarity.

[FBM]

I guess I took the statement in a different way. It didn't make me think of child-raping and the like. I was thinking more along the lines of comparing peoples who still live 'primitive' lifestyles, like some Pacific Islanders or Amazonian tribes, with say, upscale London or New York. I 'Agreed' because 'Disagree'ing would seem so arrogant, potentially at least. Child-rapoing, witch-burning and the like, though big news items, are still relatively rare if you take the full range of cultures into account.

[eXcommunicate]

I guess I took the statement in a different way. It didn't make me think of child-raping and the like. I was thinking more along the lines of comparing peoples who still live 'primitive' lifestyles, like some Pacific Islanders or Amazonian tribes, with say, upscale London or New York. I 'Agreed' because 'Disagree'ing would seem so arrogant, potentially at least. Child-rapoing, witch-burning and the like, though big news items, are still relatively rare if you take the full range of cultures into account.

My point of reference was Islam as practiced in places like Saudi Arabia, Iran, or Afghanistan.

[FBM]

My point of reference was Islam as practiced in places like Saudi Arabia, Iran, or Afghanistan.

Yeah, I understand. I guess I'm just further away from all that over here. I tend to reference SE Asia and the Pacific region more. I think that's an inherent weakness in that sort of survey. So much depends on what's on your mind at the moment.

[AshtonBlack]

I disagreed on the quiz. Not Strongly Disagree, but Disagree. I am a cultural relativist to a point, but at some point some cultures just cross the line into barbarity.

+1

[klr]

Taken from this thread: Where are you on the Political Compass? ...

I'm just curious ... There are no savage and civilised peoples; there are only different cultures. I disagreed with this statement. What do others think?

So, what do you think?

Insofar as the statement is asserting the "truth" of cultural relativism, I reject it.

However, there is a point (perhaps unintended) about the ability of society and culture to mold people, especially in their formative years. From Stephen Pinker's The Blank Slate - which I must re-read soon - I think it's around 50:50 in terms of nature v. nurture, i.e., innate personality traits v. environment, when it comes to "producing" the person. Put any of us in a radically different environment - even just a different type of family - and we could be quite different people, for good or ill.

[Animavore]

This is one of 2 questions which made me think that neutral should of been an option. Actually, I'm not sure this should've been a question at all because it's so ambiguous.

The other one was (paraphrasing) absract art doesn't represent anything and shouldn't be considered art at all.
I had to err on the side of disagree even though in some cases like Dali and Picasso I would have to say strongly disagree and in the case of artists who I have quite forgotten because either a) their works were so dull they were forgettable or b) their art so enraged me that I forgot them for their own sake lest I meet them on the street (I'm speaking of the type of 'artists' who dress mannequins in nurses outfits and put hand saws through their head and have the shaven balls to call it 'art' :pissed: ) I would have to say strongly agree.

[Ayaan]

I disagreed on the quiz. Not Strongly Disagree, but Disagree. I am a cultural relativist to a point, but at some point some cultures just cross the line into barbarity.

+1

+1

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Disturbing content:

Trigger Warning!!!1! :

The Apache Indians used to tie captives upside down to a wagon wheel and build a small fire under them to cook their brain. They considered anyone who didn't start screaming quickly to be very brave and killed them before thing got "too bad". If the person started screaming before they thought he should, they just left them and went about their business.

That, to me, is an example of savages.

[Pappa]

Taken from this thread: Where are you on the Political Compass? ...

I'm just curious ... There are no savage and civilised peoples; there are only different cultures. I disagreed with this statement. What do others think?

So, what do you think?

I agree with the statement in the sense that it refers to a difference between our own western civilisation juxtaposed with nomadic pastoralists, hunter-gatherers, jungle swidden agriculturalists, etc. The term 'savage' is a Victorian misnomer for these kinds of cultures, implying our own cultural superiority over another. I believe we are just different, and certainly not better. However, I do think some cultures are 'better' than others, but that's not connected with the savage/civilised polarity.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I think its a matter of where you draw the line on acceptable behavior. The Romans used to coat people in tar and use them to light their feasts. It was the chic thing to do back then.

[Hermit]

Taken from this thread: Where are you on the Political Compass?

I'm just curious ... There are no savage and civilised peoples; there are only different cultures. I disagreed with this statement. What do others think?

Yes, I had difficulties answering that one too because of the way the proposition is formulated. Had it been phrased something like: "No one culture is preferable to any other." or maybe even "No value of any culture is beyond toleration." I would not have hesitated pushing the "Strongly disagree" button.

Despite the racist undertone (I too wondered if the use of the word 'peoples' is referring to people by race or by culture, if it is implied that some peoples are inherently a bunch of savages while others managed to transcend savagery) I finished up strongly disagreeing with the proposal that we cannot or ought not qualitatively differentiate between cultures. I am a humanist. From that point of view some cultures are so obviously cruel, brutal and destructive to other humans in a systematic manner that it is totally nonsensical to pretend that no value judgements regarding different cultures can be made.