background preloader

Ethnocentrism

Ethnocentrism
Ethnocentrism is judging another culture solely by the values and standards of one's own culture.[1][page needed] Ethnocentric individuals judge other groups relative to their own ethnic group or culture, especially with concern for language, behavior, customs, and religion. These ethnic distinctions and subdivisions serve to define each ethnicity's unique cultural identity.[2] Ethnocentrism may be overt or subtle, and while it is considered a natural proclivity of human psychology, it has developed a generally negative connotation.[3] Origins of the concept and its study[edit] William G. Sumner created the term "ethnocentrism" upon observing the tendency for people to differentiate between the in-group and others. He defined it as "the technical name for the view of things in which one's own group is the center of everything, and all others are scaled and rated with reference to it Anthropology[edit] Biology and evolutionary theory[edit] See also[edit] References[edit] Jump up ^ John T.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnocentrism

Related:  Cultural relativismHigh Middle agesBias

Global justice This article discusses the philosophical debate about global justice. For political activism, see Global justice movement. Global justice is an issue in political philosophy arising from the concern that the world at large is unjust. Gothic architecture The interior of the western end of Reims Cathedral Gothic architecture is a style of architecture that flourished during the high and late medieval period. It evolved from Romanesque architecture and was succeeded by Renaissance architecture.

The Narrative Fallacy: Why You Shouldn’t Copy Steve Jobs There are dozens of blog posts about Ben Franklin’s strict daily routine (and they all almost always include this picture), advocating that we should follow suit. Writers love to point out how Maya Angelou made sure she wrote in a hotel room every day to help give her a safe space to work. A young Steve Jobs lived an extremely sparse possession-free lifestyle, and thousands of techies have attempted to emulate this no-nonsense, minimalistic living style. This kind of hero worship can be a good thing, it can be a guiding light.

Historical particularism Historical particularism (coined by Marvin Harris in 1968)[1] is widely considered the last American anthropological school of thought. Founded by Franz Boas, historical particularism accepted the cultural evolutionary model that had dominated anthropology up until Boas. It argued that each society is a collective representation of its unique historical past. Boas rejected parallel evolutionism, the idea that all societies are on the same path and have reached their specific level of development the same way all other societies have.[2] Instead, historical particularism showed that societies could reach the same level of cultural development through different paths.[2] Critics of historical particularism argue that it is anti theoretical because it doesn't seek to make universal theories, applicable to all the world's cultures. Boas believed that theories would arise spontaneously once enough data was collected.

Crisis of the Late Middle Ages The Crisis of the Late Middle Ages refers to a series of events in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries that brought centuries of European prosperity and growth to a halt.[1] Three major crises led to radical changes in all areas of society - they were demographic collapse, political instabilities and religious upheavals. A series of famines and plagues, beginning with the Great Famine of 1315-1317 and especially the Black Death of 1348, reduced the population perhaps by half or more as the Medieval Warm Period came to a close and the first century of the Little Ice Age began. Along with depopulation came social unrest and endemic warfare.

Correlation does not imply causation The counter assumption, that correlation proves causation, is considered a questionable cause logical fallacy in that two events occurring together are taken to have a cause-and-effect relationship. This fallacy is also known as cum hoc ergo propter hoc, Latin for "with this, therefore because of this", and "false cause". A similar fallacy, that an event that follows another was necessarily a consequence of the first event, is sometimes described as post hoc ergo propter hoc (Latin for "after this, therefore because of this"). As with any logical fallacy, identifying that the reasoning behind an argument is flawed does not imply that the resulting conclusion is false. In the instance above, if the trials had found that hormone replacement therapy caused a decrease in coronary heart disease, but not to the degree suggested by the epidemiological studies, the assumption of causality would have been correct, although the logic behind the assumption would still have been flawed. Usage[edit]

Intercultural competence A theoretical construct for cross-cultural competence, language proficiency, and regional expertise. Intercultural competence is the ability to communicate effectively and appropriately with people of other cultures:[1] Appropriately. Valued rules, norms, and expectations of the relationship are not violated significantly.Effectively. Valued goals or rewards (relative to costs and alternatives) are accomplished. In interactions with people from foreign cultures, a person who is interculturally competent understands the culture-specific concepts of perception, thinking, feeling, and acting. Christian monasticism 'St. Paul the Hermit Fed by the Raven', after Il Guercino, Dayton Art Institute Christian monasticism is the devotional practice of individuals who live ascetic and typically cloistered lives that are dedicated to Christian worship. It began to develop early in the history of the Christian Church, modeled upon scriptural examples and ideals, including those in the Old Testament, but not mandated as an institution in the scriptures.

Work skills of the future: constructive uncertainty In recent years, science has shed a great deal of light on human cognitive bias, but, lamentably, the impacts of those breakthroughs in understanding cognition have yet to be felt in business, for the most part. The first step for anyone who wants to counter our in-built biases is to be aware of them and take actions that will counter them, to the extent that is possible. That final proviso is based on science, again. In many cases, simply being aware of a certain sort of bias is not sufficient to counter its hold on our reasoning. Two well-known examples are sharedness bias and preference bias in group decision making (for a longer discussion, see Dissensus, not consensus, is the shorter but steeper path). Sharedness bias is the tendency of a group to judge shared information — information which all or most are aware of prior to entering a discussion — as being more relevant, important, accurate, and influential than unshared information.

Moral relativism Moral relativism may be any of several philosophical positions concerned with the differences in moral judgments across different people and cultures. Descriptive moral relativism holds only that some people do in fact disagree about what is moral; meta-ethical moral relativism holds that in such disagreements, nobody is objectively right or wrong; and normative moral relativism holds that because nobody is right or wrong, we ought to tolerate the behavior of others even when we disagree about the morality of it. Not all descriptive relativists adopt meta-ethical relativism, and moreover, not all meta-ethical relativists adopt normative relativism. Richard Rorty, for example, argued that relativist philosophers believe "that the grounds for choosing between such opinions is less algorithmic than had been thought", but not that any belief is equally as valid as any other.[1]

Related: