W10 Reading: Human rights and Asian values
This article discusses in more depth the universalism and relativism view of human rights. As the message said, many people are not denying the universality of human rights and are expected to be very skeptical of the relativist view. But I think we can hear more from those who advocate this relativistic view here.
Those who put forward Asian values noted that discussions and considerations on human rights have been conducted in a Western-centered manner. In other words, he points out the lack of consideration for people in Asian cultures. It also held many human rights violations accountable for having originated from the colonization of Western countries in the past. They seemed to be trying to create human rights that fit their culture in opposition to this universality, but were harshly criticized for being interpreted as meaning that elements that should be universally considered by many people could be ignored.
When I first read the article, the negative aspects of the relativist point of view were emphasized, so I didn't think carefully, but when I looked back, their arguments seem to have some sense. Clearly, Western countries, including discussions on human rights, should be held responsible for the atrocities they inflicted on their colonized countries. But they ignore their culture and force universal content. If you feel it, you'll have great antipathy.
In this article, we said that finding a direction that has both universality and relativity is our task, but I think it is more difficult than I thought. We admit that our perception of human rights is strongly reflected in Western influences, but if we acknowledge relativity, I think the possibility of new human rights violations will increase. Should relativity exist in human rights?
Comments
Post a Comment