NAME: Bea, Camela Fe

Sec: 11-ABM 3
What is Ethnocentrism

Ethnocentrism is judging another culture solely by the values and standards of one's own culture
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 ethnecity's unique cultural identity Ethnocentrism may be overt or subtle, and
while it is considered a natural proclivity of human psychology in everyday life, it has developed a
generally negative connotation In anthropology cultural relativism is seen as an antithesis and an
antonym to ethnocentrism Ethnocentrism is the view that one particular ethnic group is somehow
superior to all others. The word ethnocentrism derives from the Greek word ethnos, meaning nation
or people, and the English word center. A common idiom for ethnocentrism is tunnel vision. In this
context, ethnocentrism is the view that a particular ethnic groups system of beliefs and values is
morally superior to all others. Cultural relativism is the view that individual beliefs and values systems
are culturally relative. That is, no one ethnic group has the right to say that their particular system of
beliefs and values, their worldview, is in any way superior to anyone elses system of beliefs and
values. Whats right for one culture might be wrong for another and thats alright. There is no absolute
standard of right and wrong by which to compare and contrast morally contradictory cultural values.
Ethnocentrism and cultural relativism are mutually exclusive. They are two extremes on the opposite
sides of a philosophical spectrum. Is there a biblical alternative to these two extremes? There is.
There is a third extreme. Theocentrism is the view that God is superior to everyone else. The
word theocentrism derives from the Greek word theos, meaning God or gods, and the English
word center. In this context, theocentrism refers to the view that Gods system of beliefs and values is
morally superior to all others. It is perfect. Its the absolute standard by which we are to judge
everyone elses system of beliefs and values.

Example:
1) based on what I read (Hitler believed that Jews, as well as people belonging to some other
communities were all inferior to his ethnicity, and did not deserve to live. He had thousands and
thousands of innocent people slaughtered in concentration camps, all because they weren't of his
'pure' race, which was, according to him, superior among all. Though ethnocentrism is not always this
extreme, history does tell us stories about how the concept and prejudice that rose from it, took such
a turn for the worse, and had horrible consequences.) so thats show an example of Ethnocentrism
how people think that they are better than other indevidual
2) Ethnocentrism is not often presented as such a serious problem in movies, and is more often seen
as a sort of entertaining device. The father in My Big Fat Greek Wedding constantly states that he
can trace any word back to Greek origins. Furthermore, the entire movie is centered around the thrills
and issues of planning a Greek wedding. Ultimately though, the movie has a happy ending, subtly
suggesting that the positives outweigh the negatives.Another example of ethnocentrism that is
covered with humor occurs in the comedy American Wedding. Upon learning that her grandson is not
marrying a Jewish girl, Jim's grandmother becomes inconsolable. Furthermore, Michelle's father
makes the mistake of toasting to his soon-to-be in laws with hopes that they will sit many
happy shivas together. He is painted as a fool for his statement, and the movie subtly indicates a
Jewish ethnocentrism.

"What is moral relativism?"

Answer: Moral relativism is more easily understood in comparison to moral absolutism. Absolutism
claims that morality relies on universal principles (natural law, conscience). Christian absolutists
believe that God is the ultimate source of our common morality, and that it is, therefore, as
unchanging as He is. Moral relativism asserts that morality is not based on any absolute standard.
Rather, ethical truths depend on variables such as the situation, culture, one's feelings several
things can be said of the arguments for moral relativism which demonstrate their dubious nature.
First, while many of the arguments used in the attempt to support relativism might sound good at first,
there is a logical contradiction inherent in all of them because they all propose the right moral
schemethe one we all ought to follow. But this itself is absolutism. Second, even so-called
relativists reject relativism in most cases.and olso Moral relativism is the view that moral
judgments are true or false only relative to some particular standpoint (for instance, that of a culture
or a historical period) and that no standpoint is uniquely privileged over all others. It has often been
associated with other claims about morality: notably, the thesis that different cultures often exhibit
radically different moral values; the denial that there are universal moral values shared by every
human society; and the insistence that we should refrain from passing moral judgments on beliefs
and practices characteristic of cultures other than our own

Moral Relativism Is there a fixed standard?

Its easy to see that the foundations of modern civilization were not built on a philosophy of moral
relativism. The very act of passing a law and enforcing it suggests a fixed standard that everyone is
expected to adhere to. The reasons for this are obvious: if everyone in a society really, truly acted as
though right and wrong were purely matters of opinion, then society would implode into a battle of
might makes right. In a morally relativistic culture, the only universal reason to do (or not do)
anything is to avoid the consequences from ones peers. All human laws involve some moral principle
being enforced by threat of consequences. Speed limits are enforced on most roads because of a
moral conviction that risking other peoples lives is wrong. The same is true for murder, theft, perjury,
fraud, and so forth. When moral relativism becomes dominant, however, legitimate moral principles
are no longer the foundation of those laws. Since everything is relative, then these laws are just a
matter of opinion, and the only universal reason to follow them is to avoid consequences. This
strongly encourages people to look for ways to get away with it; after all, its just one persons
opinion against someone elses.
Do you belive in MORAL RELATIVISM explain your answer and give an example
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. So YES i belive in moral relativism in this time all of poeple have their own
way of expressing thing

Example of Moral relativism

All ancient civilisations have acknowledged that mankind needs rules to be able to function properly.
Laws are one of the cornerstones of a civilised society. If there were no laws, society would be
uncivilized and in a chaotic state of anarchy. These laws are decided and administered usually by
leaders in the society. A good society is said to be one that makes it easy for its citizens to be good.
Western civilisation has, until now, based its laws on the principles of Judeo-Christianity. Principles
mean moral absolutes. During the 20th century things began to change. There has been a shift in
education, the media and politics towards moral relativism.Moral relativism teaches that there are no
absolute moral truths...what is true for you may not necessarily be true for me. It believes and
teaches there is no right or wrong, good or bad. Essentially, moral relativism says that anything goes,
because life is ultimately without meaning. Words like "ought" and "should" are rendered
meaningless. In this way, moral relativism claims to be morally neutral. In describing her view on
morality, the President of Planned Parenthood Federation of America once stated, "...teaching
morality doesn't mean imposing my moral values on others. It means sharing wisdom, giving reasons
for believing as I do - and then trusting others to think and judge for themselves." She claims to be
morally neutral, yet her message is clearly intended to influence the thinking of others... an intention
that is not, in fact, neutral.Evidence that moral relativism is seen as more "fair" or "neutral" than a
"hardline" stance on morality is seen in a 2002 column from Fox News analyst Bill O'Reilly, who
asked "Why is it wrong to be right?" In his article, O'Reilly cites recent Zogby poll findings regarding
what is being taught in American universities.Studies indicate 75% of American college professors
currently teach that there is no such thing as right and wrong. Rather, they treat the questions of good
and evil as relative to "individual values and cultural diversity." The problem with this, according to
O'Reilly, is that "they see the world not as it is, but as they want it to be. And annoying questions
about moral absolutes and unacceptable behavior are usually left unanswered."By accepting the
doctrine of moral relativism, those who could obtain power could justify state-sponsored murder and
plunder by pointing out that since morals don't really exist and are merely a product of one's class or
upbringing, there is no moral argument against the state version of murder and plunder.This is what
happened in Nazi Germany, where the extermination of millions of people was perfectly legal under
German law at that time. With no moral argument, it could be argued that natural rights don't really
exist, since to defend natural rights one would have to say that it's unethical to violate natural rights,
but since there is no morality there can be no ethics - except when it's modeled under the pretense of
"the ends justify the means."

Bibliography : From greek word biblion book and graphia writing as a discipline, is
traditionally the academic study of books as physical, cultural objects; in this sense, it is also known
as bibliogy Carter and Barker (2010) describe bibliography as a twofold scholarly disciplinethe
organized listing of books and the systematic description of books as physical objects A bibliography
is a list of all of the sources you have used (whether referenced or not) in the process of researching
your work. In general a bibliography should include the following

1)the authors' names

2)the titles of the works

3)the names and locations of the companies that published your copies of the sources

4)the dates your copies were published

 5)the page numbers of your sources (if they are part of multi-source volumes)

Enumerative bibliographies are based on a unifying principle such as creator, subject, date, topic or
other characteristic. An entry in an enumerative bibliography provides the core elements of a text
resource including a title, the creator(s), publication date and place of publication. Belanger (1977)
distinguishes an enumerative bibliography from other bibliographic forms such as descriptive
bibliography, analytical bibliography or textual bibliography in that its function is to record and list,
rather than describe a source in detail or with any reference to the source's physical nature,
materiality or textual transmission. The enumerative list may be comprehensive or selective. One
noted example would be Tanselle's bibliography that exhaustively enumerates topics and sources
related to all forms of bibliography. A more common and particular instance of an enumerative
bibliography relates to specific sources used or considered in preparing a scholarly paper or
academic term paper.
Citation styles vary. An entry for a book in a bibliography usually contains the following elements:

creator(s)
title
publisher and place of publication

LINK: http://www.plagiarism.org/article/whats-a-bibliography
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bibliography