Ethnocentrism is the tendency to judge other cultures by the standards of one's own, instead of by the standards of the culture concerned. It often carries the belief that one's own culture is superior, more correct or more normal than others. W. G. Sumner gave the term its classic definition in Folkways (1906). Its opposite is cultural relativism, which means understanding a culture in its own terms.
This note covers the meaning, history, causes and effects of ethnocentrism, and its contrast with cultural relativism, for the UPSC Anthropology Optional. It falls under Paper I, topic 2.1 (ethnocentrism vis-à-vis cultural relativism) of the Anthropology Optional syllabus.
Meaning and definitions of ethnocentrism
To be ethnocentric is to use one's own culture or ethnic group as the frame of reference for judging the practices, beliefs and behaviour of other people. The judgement is usually negative, and usually concerns the things that mark a group's identity: language, behaviour, customs and religion. In common usage the word can mean any culturally biased judgement.
| Scholar | Definition |
|---|---|
| W. G. Sumner, Folkways (1906) | "The view of things in which one's own group is the center of everything, and all others are scaled and rated with reference to it." It leads to pride, vanity, belief in the group's superiority and contempt for outsiders. |
| W. G. Sumner, War and Other Essays (1911) | Cohesion, comradeship and devotion to the in-group, carrying a sense of superiority to any out-group and a readiness to defend the in-group against it. |
| Theodor W. Adorno | A product of in-group and out-group differentiation: a positive attitude to one's own ethnic or cultural group combined with a negative attitude to others. |
Ethnocentrism is often linked with racism, stereotyping, discrimination and xenophobia, but it does not by definition involve hostility. A mild preference for one's own ways is also ethnocentrism.
Ethnocentrism in the history of anthropology
Ethnocentrism is as old as contact between peoples; outsiders have long been labelled "barbarians". Within anthropology its history has three phases.
The nineteenth century: ranking cultures
- Early anthropologists described and ranked cultures by how far they had reached certain milestones, such as monotheistic religion and advanced technology. The milestones were those of Western society.
- The rankings were shaped by colonialism and by the belief that colonised societies needed improvement.
- E. B. Tylor, in Primitive Culture (1871), wrote of "primitive" societies on a scale leading up to civilization. Terms such as "savage" and "primitive" came to be used in a derogatory way. Today "tribal" or "pre-literate" is preferred.
- European travellers judged unfamiliar languages and religions harshly simply because they could not understand them. Such attitudes were used to justify colonial rule and Westernisation.
Franz Boas and the turn to cultural relativism
Franz Boas saw the flaw in ranking cultures on a single scale. He set out to show that race does not determine cultural capacity. In The Mind of Primitive Man (1911) he argued that we value our own civilization because we were raised in it, and that other civilizations, based on different traditions, may be of no less value, even if we cannot appreciate them without having grown up under their influence.
Boas and his colleagues held that there are no inferior races or cultures. This gave anthropology the principle of cultural relativism: investigating and comparing societies with as little prejudice as possible, and without a developmental scale.
Fieldwork as the remedy
Boas and Bronisław Malinowski argued that a human science must rise above ethnocentric views, and urged anthropologists to do ethnographic fieldwork to overcome their own. Classic works in this spirit are:
- Margaret Mead, Coming of Age in Samoa (1928), later severely criticised for its data and generalisations;
- Bronisław Malinowski, The Sexual Life of Savages in North-Western Melanesia (1929);
- Ruth Benedict, Patterns of Culture (1934).
Mead and Benedict were students of Boas.
Causes of ethnocentrism
Ethnocentrism is learned behaviour, not an inborn trait.
| Explanation | How it produces ethnocentrism |
|---|---|
| Enculturation | People absorb the norms and values of their group from childhood, and with them loyalty to the in-group. Stereotypes are passed from one generation to the next. |
| Limited contact | Little interaction with other cultures prevents understanding and appreciation of cultural differences. |
| Social identity (Henri Tajfel and John Turner) | Strong identification with one's own culture creates a positive view of it. To keep that view, people compare other groups unfavourably. |
| Realistic conflict theory | Real or perceived competition, conflict or threat between groups strengthens in-group identification and out-group hostility. |
Effects of ethnocentrism
| Positive functions | Negative consequences |
|---|---|
| Strengthens group solidarity and loyalty | Prejudice, stereotyping and discrimination |
| Supports pride in, and continuity of, one's culture | Resistance to new ideas and to culture change |
| Promotes conformity to group norms | Inter-group conflict |
| In extreme forms: slavery, apartheid and genocide |
Historical examples of its extreme effects include the Crusades, the Trail of Tears, the Holocaust and the wartime internment of Japanese Americans. Institutions such as the United Nations and the Olympic Games were created in part to counter such attitudes through co-operation between nations and cultures.
Ethnocentrism and racism
The two are often associated, but they are not the same.
- Ethnocentrism rests on culture: one's own way of life is taken as the standard.
- Racism rests on supposed biological difference: one race is held to be inherently superior.
Because ethnocentrism involves strong identification with the in-group, it readily leads to negative feelings and stereotypes about out-groups, and so is easily confused with racism. Scholars agree that avoiding stereotypes is a prerequisite for overcoming it, and that the mass media play a key role.
Ethnocentrism and cultural relativism compared
| Basis | Ethnocentrism | Cultural relativism |
|---|---|---|
| Standard of judgement | One's own culture | The culture being studied |
| Attitude | Own culture is superior or normal | No culture is inherently superior |
| Key name | W. G. Sumner (1906) | Franz Boas and his students |
| In anthropology | A bias to be overcome | A methodological principle |
| Typical result | Ranking of cultures; misunderstanding | Understanding in context, through fieldwork |
Using this topic in a UPSC answer
- Open with Sumner's definition from Folkways (1906).
- Show ethnocentrism within anthropology: the evolutionists' ranking of cultures.
- Bring in Boas and cultural relativism as the corrective, with fieldwork as the method.
- Give both positive functions and negative consequences.
- Use an Indian illustration, such as the labelling of tribal communities as "backward", and link it to policy debates on tribal development and isolation.
Frequently asked questions
What is ethnocentrism in anthropology?
Ethnocentrism is the practice of judging other cultures by the standards of one's own culture. It usually involves the belief that one's own way of life is superior, more correct or more normal than that of others.
Who introduced the term ethnocentrism?
The American sociologist William Graham Sumner brought the term into the social sciences in his book Folkways (1906). He defined it as the view of things in which one's own group is the centre of everything.
What is the opposite of ethnocentrism?
Cultural relativism is the opposite of ethnocentrism. It means understanding a culture in its own terms, without judging it by the standards of another. Franz Boas and his students established it in anthropology.
What causes ethnocentrism?
Ethnocentrism is learned through enculturation. It is strengthened by limited contact with other cultures, by strong identification with one's own group, and by real or perceived competition and conflict between groups.
Is ethnocentrism always harmful?
No. In mild forms it strengthens group solidarity, loyalty and cultural continuity. In stronger forms it leads to prejudice, discrimination and conflict, and in extreme cases to slavery, apartheid and genocide.
What is the difference between ethnocentrism and racism?
Ethnocentrism judges others by cultural standards and treats one's own culture as the norm. Racism claims that one race is biologically superior to others. Ethnocentrism can exist without racism, though the two often occur together.
How do anthropologists overcome ethnocentrism?
Anthropologists overcome ethnocentrism through long-term fieldwork and participant observation, by learning the local language, and by adopting cultural relativism as a working method.