I interrupt this discussion of ethnocentrism and ethnorelativism to bring you a different perspective...
"Many say that it is ethnocentric to claim that our religion is superior to others. Yet isn't that very statement ethnocentric? Most non-Western cultures have no problem saying that their culture and religion is best. The idea that it is wrong to do so is deeply rooted in Western traditions of self-criticism and individualism. To charge others with the 'sin' of ethnocentrism is really a way of saying, 'Our culture's approach to other cultures is superior to yours.' We are then doing the very thing we forbid others to do."
"It is no more narrow to claim that one religion is right than to claim that one way to think about all religions (namely that all are equal) is right."
"Many say that it is ethnocentric to claim that our religion is superior to others. Yet isn't that very statement ethnocentric? Most non-Western cultures have no problem saying that their culture and religion is best. The idea that it is wrong to do so is deeply rooted in Western traditions of self-criticism and individualism. To charge others with the 'sin' of ethnocentrism is really a way of saying, 'Our culture's approach to other cultures is superior to yours.' We are then doing the very thing we forbid others to do."
"It is no more narrow to claim that one religion is right than to claim that one way to think about all religions (namely that all are equal) is right."
Timothy Keller, The Reason for God
I will be commenting on this quote, but at this point will put it out for your consideration. Is he right? Does he accurately portray "ethnocentrism"? Is talk of ethnocentrism, itself ethnocentric? Is there possibly a difference between an ethnocentric and a non-ethnocentric way for people of religious faith to relate to others (i.e., to believe that a religion or belief system is true, but not being ethnocentric about it)?
No comments:
Post a Comment