Cultural relativism is a methodological principle established by Franz Boas in 1887. It requires understanding cultural values in their own context—not judging them by external standards. It underpins ethnography and ethnology. It emerged fully in the early 20th century and was popularised after World War II as a response to ethnocentrism, colonialism and racism. Its foundational discipline is anthropology.
Boas built it to dismantle the idea of absolute civilisation.
3:51
How it gets done
Ethnography and ethnology are its direct methods.
5:15
What it broke
It severed culture from race—and exposed science’s built-in bias.
1 more chapterFewer chapters
Worth your time?
Yes. Study the whole thing.
4/ 5
What works
displaces ethnocentric science
establishes ethnography as discipline
breaks race-culture linkage
What does not
justify moral indifference
resolve cross-cultural conflict
replace ethical reasoning
Study it if
anthropologists
museum curators
anti-racist educators
Skip it if
policy-makers needing action frameworks
human rights advocates seeking universal standards
Who should study it, and who should skipHide who it is for
The written brief1 min read
What the thing is
Cultural relativism is a methodological principle. It requires understanding cultural values in their own context—not judging them by outside standards.
Where it came from
Franz Boas established it in 1887. He argued civilization is relative. His conclusion followed from fieldwork showing culture and race are unrelated.
What it gets right
It correctly insists that cultural values cannot be assessed by external standards. It forces ethnographers to learn language and live with people. It dismantles the race-culture link. It exposes scientists’ ethnocentrism as structural, not personal.
What it gets wrong
It offers no way to judge harmful practices within a culture. It conflates methodological restraint with moral neutrality. It does not resolve how to act when values conflict across cultures.
Why it matters now
It remains the operating framework for ethnography and ethnology. It underpins anti-racist scholarship. But its misuse as moral relativism fuels paralysis in human rights debates.
Is it worth your time
Yes—if you work in anthropology, education, policy or intercultural engagement. No—if you treat it as a moral doctrine rather than a method.
