Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > The Case Against Cultural Evaluation

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

The Case Against Cultural Evaluation: Relativism, Culturalism and Romanticism

Research output: Contribution in Book/Report/Proceedings - With ISBN/ISSNChapter

Published

Standard

The Case Against Cultural Evaluation: Relativism, Culturalism and Romanticism. / Johnson, Matthew Thomas.
Evaluating Culture: Well-Being, Institutions and Circumstance. ed. / Matthew Thomas Johnson. Springer, 2013. p. 13-41.

Research output: Contribution in Book/Report/Proceedings - With ISBN/ISSNChapter

Harvard

Johnson, MT 2013, The Case Against Cultural Evaluation: Relativism, Culturalism and Romanticism. in MT Johnson (ed.), Evaluating Culture: Well-Being, Institutions and Circumstance. Springer, pp. 13-41. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137313799_2

APA

Johnson, M. T. (2013). The Case Against Cultural Evaluation: Relativism, Culturalism and Romanticism. In M. T. Johnson (Ed.), Evaluating Culture: Well-Being, Institutions and Circumstance (pp. 13-41). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137313799_2

Vancouver

Johnson MT. The Case Against Cultural Evaluation: Relativism, Culturalism and Romanticism. In Johnson MT, editor, Evaluating Culture: Well-Being, Institutions and Circumstance. Springer. 2013. p. 13-41 doi: 10.1057/9781137313799_2

Author

Johnson, Matthew Thomas. / The Case Against Cultural Evaluation : Relativism, Culturalism and Romanticism. Evaluating Culture: Well-Being, Institutions and Circumstance. editor / Matthew Thomas Johnson. Springer, 2013. pp. 13-41

Bibtex

@inbook{1cca7465514d406f8f5f2b1e43d37f08,
title = "The Case Against Cultural Evaluation: Relativism, Culturalism and Romanticism",
abstract = "In order to develop a universal account of enduring, immanent human interests upon which to mount a case against cultural sources of injury, it is necessary to overcome a series of {\textquoteleft}relativist{\textquoteright} claims regarding the nature of the human condition. My aim in this chapter is to unpack these claims and, by examining elements of the work of John Gray, to suggest means by which to overcome them. To do this, I outline, first, the empirical case against universalism and, second, the epistemological and methodological basis of the anti-universalist paradigms — social constructivism. I then identify three different, and to varying degrees incompatible, schematic claims. The first, anti-foundationalist, schema holds that there can be no objective basis for any form of evaluation as all matrices are pure, subjective constructs. The second, culturalist approach, departs normatively, if not analytically, from this position, arguing that matrices of evaluation do have validity but only within particular cultural-linguistic spheres. The third, romantic form is not relativistic at all, holding that the interests of humans lie in pre-modern societies with close ties to nature, and employing relativism instrumentally to check the advance of Western, industrial culture. Having detailed these positions, I then provide brief exegesis of one possible means of responding to their challenges — elements of the thought of John Gray. Gray{\textquoteright}s pluralist perfectionist defence of objective, universal values and categories of well-being together with deployment of circumstance as an evaluative parameter, serve as a bridge to the remaining chapters of the book, in which I examine more fully ideas to which Gray refers only cursorily. I begin by discussing the historical development of contemporary, anthropological invocations of relativism. ",
author = "Johnson, {Matthew Thomas}",
year = "2013",
doi = "10.1057/9781137313799_2",
language = "English",
isbn = "9781349333769",
pages = "13--41",
editor = "Johnson, {Matthew Thomas }",
booktitle = "Evaluating Culture",
publisher = "Springer",

}

RIS

TY - CHAP

T1 - The Case Against Cultural Evaluation

T2 - Relativism, Culturalism and Romanticism

AU - Johnson, Matthew Thomas

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - In order to develop a universal account of enduring, immanent human interests upon which to mount a case against cultural sources of injury, it is necessary to overcome a series of ‘relativist’ claims regarding the nature of the human condition. My aim in this chapter is to unpack these claims and, by examining elements of the work of John Gray, to suggest means by which to overcome them. To do this, I outline, first, the empirical case against universalism and, second, the epistemological and methodological basis of the anti-universalist paradigms — social constructivism. I then identify three different, and to varying degrees incompatible, schematic claims. The first, anti-foundationalist, schema holds that there can be no objective basis for any form of evaluation as all matrices are pure, subjective constructs. The second, culturalist approach, departs normatively, if not analytically, from this position, arguing that matrices of evaluation do have validity but only within particular cultural-linguistic spheres. The third, romantic form is not relativistic at all, holding that the interests of humans lie in pre-modern societies with close ties to nature, and employing relativism instrumentally to check the advance of Western, industrial culture. Having detailed these positions, I then provide brief exegesis of one possible means of responding to their challenges — elements of the thought of John Gray. Gray’s pluralist perfectionist defence of objective, universal values and categories of well-being together with deployment of circumstance as an evaluative parameter, serve as a bridge to the remaining chapters of the book, in which I examine more fully ideas to which Gray refers only cursorily. I begin by discussing the historical development of contemporary, anthropological invocations of relativism.

AB - In order to develop a universal account of enduring, immanent human interests upon which to mount a case against cultural sources of injury, it is necessary to overcome a series of ‘relativist’ claims regarding the nature of the human condition. My aim in this chapter is to unpack these claims and, by examining elements of the work of John Gray, to suggest means by which to overcome them. To do this, I outline, first, the empirical case against universalism and, second, the epistemological and methodological basis of the anti-universalist paradigms — social constructivism. I then identify three different, and to varying degrees incompatible, schematic claims. The first, anti-foundationalist, schema holds that there can be no objective basis for any form of evaluation as all matrices are pure, subjective constructs. The second, culturalist approach, departs normatively, if not analytically, from this position, arguing that matrices of evaluation do have validity but only within particular cultural-linguistic spheres. The third, romantic form is not relativistic at all, holding that the interests of humans lie in pre-modern societies with close ties to nature, and employing relativism instrumentally to check the advance of Western, industrial culture. Having detailed these positions, I then provide brief exegesis of one possible means of responding to their challenges — elements of the thought of John Gray. Gray’s pluralist perfectionist defence of objective, universal values and categories of well-being together with deployment of circumstance as an evaluative parameter, serve as a bridge to the remaining chapters of the book, in which I examine more fully ideas to which Gray refers only cursorily. I begin by discussing the historical development of contemporary, anthropological invocations of relativism.

U2 - 10.1057/9781137313799_2

DO - 10.1057/9781137313799_2

M3 - Chapter

SN - 9781349333769

SN - 9781137313799

SP - 13

EP - 41

BT - Evaluating Culture

A2 - Johnson, Matthew Thomas

PB - Springer

ER -