|
|
От
|
Alexandre Putt
|
|
|
К
|
Игорь
|
|
|
Дата
|
25.03.2007 01:03:52
|
|
|
Рубрики
|
Тексты;
|
|
Типично постмодернистский текст. Учимся у антропологов
Ни логического анализа, ни ссылок, ни работы с действительностью. Что тут комментировать?
1. Кто эти "солидаристки настроенные посетители"? Какие Ваши доказательства? Если бы Вы провели анализ текстов этих "посетителей" и установили созвучность высказываемых идей "постмодернизму" - это одно. А бездоказательно обвинять в отхождении от некоторой "истины" - это другое.
2. Нигде в изложении своей позиции не вижу и следа "эклектизма", смешения "субъекта и объекта" и др.
3. По этическому релятивизму, это просто нелепость. Автор не даёт корректного определения понятия
Вот что пишут знающие люди:
Cultural relativism is the principle that an individual human's beliefs and activities should be interpreted in terms of his or her own culture. This principle was established as axiomatic in anthropological research by Franz Boas in the first few decades of the 20th century and later popularized by Boas' students...
Cultural relativism involves specific epistemological and methodological claims. Whether or not these claims necessitate a specific ethical stance is a matter of debate. Nevertheless, this principle should not be confused with moral relativism.
Cultural relativism was in part a response to Western ethnocentrism. Ethnocentrism may take obvious forms, in which one consciously believes that one's people's arts are the most beautiful, values the most virtuous, and beliefs the most truthful.
[Franz Boas] understood "culture" to include not only certain tastes in food, art, and music, or beliefs about religion. He assumed a much broader notion of culture, defined as
the totality of the mental and physical reactions and activities that characterize the behavior of the individuals composing a social group collectively and individually in relation to their natural environment, to other groups, to members of the group itself, and of each individual to himself.
This understanding of culture confronts anthropologists with two problems: first, how to escape the unconscious bonds of one's own culture, which inevitably bias our perceptions of and reactions to the world, and second, how to make sense of an unfamiliar culture. The principle of cultural relativism thus forced anthropologists to develop innovative methods and heuristic strategies.
Boas and his students realized that if they were to conduct scientific research in other cultures, they would need to employ methods that would help them escape the limits of their own ethnocentrism. One such method is that of ethnography: basically, they advocated living with people of another culture for an extended period of time, so that they could learn the local language and be enculturated, at least partially, into that culture. In this context, cultural relativism is an attitude that is of fundamental methodological importance, because it calls attention to the importance of the local context in understanding the meaning of particular human beliefs and activities. Thus, in 1948 Virginia Heyer wrote, "Cultural relativity, to phrase it in starkest abstraction, states the relativity of the part to the whole. The part gains its cultural significance by its place in the whole, and cannot retain its integrity in a different situation."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_relativism (вся статья - слишком большая для цитирования)
Таким образом, культурный релятивизм не есть релятивизм моральный.
И уж куда честнее в своих методах порицаемые либеральные мыслители:
* Приводится оригинальная позиция оппонента (с цитатами)
* Даётся логический анализ структуры аргументов оппонента
* Логические посылки сопоставляются на а) когерентность б) соответствие реальности
Авторы, которые используют другие методы (например, сходу записать оппонентов в "постмодернисты") - стоят гораздо ближе к постмодернизму, чем им хотелось бы думать.