Free Essays on Culture Shock

Cultural Relativism: Is truth defined by our culture or our culture by truth? In his article â€Å"Cultural relativism and cultural values†, Melville Herkovits defines the principle of cultural relativism as â€Å"judgments are based on experience, and experience is interpreted by each individual in terms of his own enculturation† (26). This is the basic premise of cultural relativism, that beliefs, values, and morals are all based on one’s culture. Therefore, since morality is based on society and different societies have different views of right and wrong, there can be no moral absolutes. Since there are no absolutes, under this view of cultural relativism all moral views determined by one’s culture are deemed true whether they conflict or not. Upon first glance, relativism seems like a very appropriate concept of morality in the world. It is clear to see that there are differences of what is acceptable and unacceptable in different societies across the world. Growing up in Western culture I have grown a fondness for meat, especially steak. It is a momentous occasion when I can go out or fix a nice, juicy steak for a meal, the bigger the better. This is not a problem in my culture, save those few health conscience people who say I will die by heart disease. However, if I were raised in an eastern, Hindu, culture these dietary practices would be considered wrong. My act of eating cow would be considered a moral atrocity. From examples like these and many others around the world we can see a good case for different cultures having different moral views, but is that really the case? I believe that at a surface level cultural relativism holds some merit, however if we look deeper into the issue we can find a flawed, and inaccurate theory for the way that the world should work. Some of the biggest arguments given in defense of cultural relativism are the many different practices of different cultures from around th... Free Essays on Culture Shock Free Essays on Culture Shock Cultural Relativism: Is truth defined by our culture or our culture by truth? In his article â€Å"Cultural relativism and cultural values†, Melville Herkovits defines the principle of cultural relativism as â€Å"judgments are based on experience, and experience is interpreted by each individual in terms of his own enculturation† (26). This is the basic premise of cultural relativism, that beliefs, values, and morals are all based on one’s culture. Therefore, since morality is based on society and different societies have different views of right and wrong, there can be no moral absolutes. Since there are no absolutes, under this view of cultural relativism all moral views determined by one’s culture are deemed true whether they conflict or not. Upon first glance, relativism seems like a very appropriate concept of morality in the world. It is clear to see that there are differences of what is acceptable and unacceptable in different societies across the world. Growing up in Western culture I have grown a fondness for meat, especially steak. It is a momentous occasion when I can go out or fix a nice, juicy steak for a meal, the bigger the better. This is not a problem in my culture, save those few health conscience people who say I will die by heart disease. However, if I were raised in an eastern, Hindu, culture these dietary practices would be considered wrong. My act of eating cow would be considered a moral atrocity. From examples like these and many others around the world we can see a good case for different cultures having different moral views, but is that really the case? I believe that at a surface level cultural relativism holds some merit, however if we look deeper into the issue we can find a flawed, and inaccurate theory for the way that the world should work. Some of the biggest arguments given in defense of cultural relativism are the many different practices of different cultures from around th... Free Essays on Culture Shock Oberg (1960) was the first person to use the term â€Å"culture shock† referring to the experience of living or visiting a new culture and facing unfamiliarity. The anthropologist provides six aspects of culture shock: strain, a sense of loss and feeling of deprivation, rejection, confusion, surprise/anxiety even disgust and indignation, and feelings of impotence. Researchers view this phenomenon as a normal and anticipated reaction and as part of the process of adaptation. Bock (1970) has maintained that culture shock is an emotional reaction that stems from the inability to â€Å"understand, control, and predict another’s behavior.† (Furnham, 1997) Culture shock is seen as a stress reaction where significant psychological and physical rewards are uncertain and consequently, unpredictable and uncontrollable. Hence, a person may feel confused and anxious until they form an understanding of their environment and the social constructs associated with that new surro unding. Culture shock includes the individual’s lack of a point of reference, social norms and rules to steer their actions and comprehend others’ behavior. Moreover, some common symptoms of culture shock consist of anxiety, specifically a â€Å"free-floating† anxiety. Frequently, lack of self-confidence, distrust of others, and mild psychosomatic complaints also occur in this stage. These reactions, however, are not the case for every person having an abroad experience. Adler (1975) and David (1971) have argued that, although culture shock is most often linked with negative outcomes, it may, in small measures, be consequential for self-development and growth. The extent of culture shock has been observed to be associated with the amount of difference between the visitor’s culture and the culture of the country they are visiting or working in. These differences refer to the abundance of cultural diversity in social beliefs and behaviors. Furnham and Bochner (1986) have...