On my online Anthropology of Religion class, we will discuss and debate ethnocentrism and cultural relativism and the difference between the two. By the way, those who responded to my last post on Anthropology of Religion helped me greatly. I already exposed the limits of the scientific method on this class and showed how it cannot prove that what Nazis did to Jews is morally wrong (interestingly, no one attacked my argument). A few arguments has been presented so far, of which I could use some guidance on refuting its assumptions and philosophical views: 1. One person mentioned native indian infanticide (e.g. it takes place in Brazil's Amazon forest). The professor raised the following question: "Does culture and tradition justify those types of actions?" The Professor's response to that question: "If the response is 'yes', any people may make of its own cultural tradition a great prescriptive system of conduct and behavior, to educate as well as to punish; many times punishment involves one own life. If the answer is 'no', we must see the interests of the one speaking, because in that case, we could violate the culture of any country in the name of human rights, of democracy, and of liberty." I'm sure she was thinking about religion, too, but omitted that in her answer to avoid being polemic on the online group discussion given that some students aren't so polite and blame religion for everything.