قوممداری یا قوممحوری (به انگلیسی: Ethnocentrism)، رویکردیست که در آن ویژگیهای اخلاقی، اجتماعی و دینی اقوام دیگر را با معیارهای قوم خود بررسی کرده و اختلافهای آنان را به حساب ناهنجاریشان بگذاریم. وجود نوعی قوممداری ذاتی در انسانها موجب میشود هیچکاری سادهتر از بد گفتن از دیگران نباشد. قوممداری ریشه در این احساس دارد که روشهای زندگی، ارزشها و الگوهای سازواری گروهی که شخص خود را متعلق به آن میداند، نسبت به گروههای دیگر برتری دارد.
واژهنامه انگلیسی آکسفورد، از نخستین کاربرد واژه قوممداری در سال ۱۹۰۰ توسط مکگی در «اخبار گزارشهای سالانه قومشناسی آمریکایی» خبر میدهد. مکگی قوممداری را یکی از ویژگیهای اقوام ابتدایی معرفی میکند، درحالیکه او نمیتوانست تمایلات قوممدارانه فرهنگ اروپایی خود را تصور کند. نخستین تعریف قوممداری آنگونه که در سده بیستویکم فهمیده میشود، در سال ۱۹۵۱ توسط اوانس پریچارد انسانشناس بریتانیایی ارائه شد. او قوممداری را «ادعا یا اعتقاد به برتری یک گروه بر دیگران» میدانست و اصرار داشت که «برای تقدیر از گوناگونی ارزشمند فرهنگ بشر و زندگی اجتماعی بایستی این رویکرد قوممدارانه از میان برود.»
قوم مداری با بیگانهگرایی در ارتباط است. بیگانهگرایی که با گرایش به رفتارهای عجیب و تمایل به پدیدههای غریب دیگر مشخص میشود، اگر با دید تحقیرآمیز نسبت به آنان همراه شود، میتواند به قوممداری بکشد و اگر با نفی دیگری و عداوت با او همراه شود، به نژادگرایی منجر میشود.
قوممداری در مردمشناسی[ویرایش]
تلاش مردمشناسان همواره بر رهایی از چنگال قوممداری بودهاست. اما با این حال نمونههایی از این رویکرد در میان مردمشناسان بهویژه در سده نوزدهم به چشم میخورد. اینکه لوسین لوی-برول مردمشناس فرانسوی از «ذهنیت پیشمنطقی» جوامع بدوی در برابر «ذهنیت منطقی» سخن میگفت نشان از رویکردی قوممدارانه داشت. تلاش رابرت لاوی انسانشناس آمریکایی برای تقلیل نظام خویشاوندی و زناشویی جوامع ابتدایی به خانوادههای تکهمسر جامعه خود و نظر جان لباک انگلیسی در مورد بدون مذهب بودن تمام جوامع بیسواد نمونههای دیگری از تأثیر قوممداری بر تحقیقات مردمشناسان هستند.
Ethnocentrism is a term used in social sciences and anthropology to describe the act of judging another culture based on the values and standards of one's own culture are superior – especially with regards to language, behavior, customs, and religion. These aspects or categories are distinctions that define each ethnicity's unique cultural identity.
The term ethnocentrism, deriving from the Greek word etho meaning "nation, people, or cultural grouping" and the Latin word centric meaning "center," was first applied in the social sciences by American sociologist William G. Sumner. In his 1906 book, Folkways, Sumner describes ethnocentrism as; "the technical name for 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." He further characterized ethnocentrism as often leading to pride, vanity, the belief in one's own group's superiority, and contempt for outsiders.
Over time ethnocentrism developed alongside the progression of social understandings by people such as social theorist, Theodore W. Adorno. In Adorno's The Authoritarian Personality, he and his colleagues of the Frankfurt School established a broader definition of the term as a result of "in group-out group differentiation", stating that ethnocentrism "combines a positive attitude toward one's own ethnic/cultural group (the in-group) with a negative attitude toward the other ethnic/cultural group (the out-group)". Both of these juxtaposing attitudes are also a result of a process known as Social Identification and Social Counter-Identification.
Origins and development
The term ethnocentrism is believed by scholars to have been created by Austrian sociologist Ludwig Gumplowicz in the 19th century, although alternate theories suggest that he only popularized the concept as opposed to inventing it. He saw ethnocentrism as a phenomenon similar to the delusions of geocentrism and anthropocentrism, defining Ethnocentrism as "the reasons by virtue of which each group of people believed it had always occupied the highest point, not only among contemporaneous peoples and nations, but also in relation to all peoples of the historical past."
Subsequently in the 20th century, American social scientist William G. Sumner proposed two different definitions in his 1906 book Folkways. Sumner stated that "Ethnocentrism is the technical name for this 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." In the War and Other Essays (1911), he wrote that "the sentiment of cohesion, internal comradeship, and devotion to the in-group, which carries with it a sense of superiority to any out-group and readiness to defend the interests of the in-group against the out-group, is technically known as ethnocentrism." According to Boris Bizumic it is a popular misunderstanding that Sumner originated the term ethnocentrism, stating that in actuality he brought ethnocentrism into the mainstreams of anthropology, social science, and psychology through his English publications.
Several theories have been reinforced through the social and psychological understandings of ethnocentrism including T.W Adorno's The Authoritarian Personality Theory (1950), Donald T. Campbell's Realistic Group Conflict Theory (1972), and Henri Tajfel's Social Identity Theory (1986). These theories have helped to distinguish ethnocentrism as a means to better understand the behaviors caused by In-group and Out-group differentiation throughout history and society.
The classifications of ethnocentrism originate from the studies of anthropology. With its omnipresence throughout history, ethnocentrism has always been a factor in how different cultures and groups related to one another. Examples including how historically, foreigners would be characterized as 'Barbarians', or China would believe their nation to be the 'Empire of the Center' and viewing foreigners as privileged subordinates. However, the anthropocentric interpretations initially took place most notably in the 19th century when anthropologists began to describe and rank various cultures according to the degree to which they had developed significant milestones such as; monotheistic religions, technological advancements, and other historical progressions. Anthropologist Franz Boas saw the flaws in this formulaic approach to ranking and interpreting cultural development and committed himself to overthrowing this inaccurate reasoning due to many factors involving their individual characteristics. With his methodological innovations, Boas sought to show the error of the proposition that race determined cultural capacity. Boas wrote that;
Together, Boas and his colleagues propagated the certainty that there are no inferior races or cultures. This egalitarian approach introduced the concept of Cultural Relativism to anthropology, a methodological principle for investigating and comparing societies in as unprejudiced as possible and without using a developmental scale as Anthropologists at the time were implementing. Boas and anthropologist Bronislaw Malinowski argued that any human science had to transcend the ethnocentric views that could blind any scientist's ultimate conclusions.
Both had also urged anthropologists to conduct ethnographic fieldwork in order to overcome their ethnocentrism. To help, Malinowski would develop the theory of functionalism as guides for producing non-ethnocentric studies of different cultures. Classic examples of anti-ethnocentric anthropology include Margaret Mead's Coming of Age in Samoa (1928), which in time has met with severe criticism for its incorrect data and generalisations, Malinowski's The Sexual Life of Savages in North-Western Melanesia (1929), and Ruth Benedict's Patterns of Culture (1934). Mead and Benedict were two of Boas's students.
Scholars are generally agreed that Boas developed his ideas under the influence of the German philosopher Immanuel Kant. Legend has it that, on a field trip to the Baffin Islands in 1883, Boas would pass the frigid nights reading Kant's Critique of Pure Reason. In that work, Kant argued that human understanding could not be described according to the laws that applied to the operations of nature, and that its operations were therefore free, not determined, and that ideas regulated human action, sometimes independent of material interests. Following Kant, Boas pointed out the starving Eskimos who, because of their religious beliefs, would not hunt seals to feed themselves, thus showing that no pragmatic or material calculus determined their values.
The social identity approach suggests that ethnocentric beliefs are caused by a strong identification with one's own culture that directly creates a positive view of that culture. It is theorized by Henri Tajfel and John C. Turner that in order to maintain that positive view, people make social comparisons that cast competing cultural groups in an unfavorable light.
Although the causes of ethnocentric beliefs and actions can have varying roots of context and reason, the effects of ethnocentrism has had both negative and positive effects throughout history. The most detrimental effects of ethnocentrism resulting into genocide, apartheid, slavery, and many violent conflicts. Historical examples of these negative effects of ethnocentrism are The Holocaust, the Crusades, the Trail of Tears, and the internment of Japanese Americans. These events were a result of cultural differences reinforced inhumanely by a superior, majority group. In his 1976 book on evolution, The Selfish Gene, evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins writes that "blood-feuds and inter-clan warfare are easily interpretative in terms of Hamilton's genetic theory." Simulation-based experiments in evolutionary game theory have attempted to provide an explanation for the selection of ethnocentric-strategy phenotypes.
The positive examples of ethnocentrism throughout history have aimed to prohibit the callousness of ethnocentrism and reverse the perspectives of living in a single culture. These organizations can include the formation of the United Nations; aimed to maintain international relations, and the Olympic Games; a celebration of sports and friendly competition between cultures.