Editing Relativism (section)

===Anthropological versus philosophical relativism===
[[Anthropological relativism]] refers to a [[methodology|methodological]] stance, in which the researcher suspends (or brackets) their own cultural prejudice while trying to understand beliefs or behaviors in their contexts. This has become known as [[methodological relativism]], and concerns itself specifically with avoiding [[ethnocentrism]] or the application of one's own cultural standards to the assessment of other cultures.<ref>{{Cite news
 |first=Harry
 |last=Collins
 |author-link=Harry Collins
 |title=What's wrong with relativism?
 |url=http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/print/1607
 |work=[[Physics World]]
 |publisher=IOP Publishing
 |location=[[Bristol, UK]]
 |date=1998-04-01
 |access-date=2008-04-16
 |quote=...methodological relativism - impartial assessment of how knowledge develops - is the key idea for sociology of scientific knowledge...}}</ref> This is also the basis of the so-called "[[emic]]" and "[[etic]]" distinction, in which:
* An ''emic'' or ''insider'' account of behavior is a description of a society in terms that are meaningful to the participant or actor's own culture; an emic account is therefore culture-specific, and typically refers to what is considered "[[common sense]]" within the culture under observation.
* An ''etic'' or outsider account is a description of a society by an observer, in terms that can be applied to other cultures; that is, an etic account is culturally neutral, and typically refers to the conceptual framework of the social scientist. (This is complicated when it is scientific research itself that is under study, or when there is theoretical or terminological disagreement within the social sciences.)

Philosophical relativism, in contrast, asserts that the truth of a proposition depends on the metaphysical, or theoretical frame, or the instrumental method, or the context in which the proposition is expressed, or on the person, groups, or culture who interpret the proposition.<ref>{{cite book| url = https://books.google.com/books?id=U5lKIVkSPtcC| title = Locke, Shaftesbury, and Hutcheson: Contesting Diversity in the Enlightenment and Beyond|first1=Daniel|last1=Carey|year=2005|location=Cambridge|publisher=Cambridge University Press| isbn = 9781139447904}}</ref>

Methodological relativism and philosophical relativism can exist independently from one another, but most anthropologists base their methodological relativism on that of the philosophical variety.<ref>{{cite web| url = https://www.jstor.org/stable/2796798| title = Methodological and Philosophical Relativism by Gananath Obeyesekere| jstor = 2796798}}</ref>