2_5386635755147778692

1.

Beliefs, Values, and
Cultural Universals
Ruzmetova Diana Komilovna act.assist.prof. (PhD)

2.

Value Orientations Theory
• The Kluckhohn-Strodtbeck Value Orientations theory
represents one of the earliest efforts to develop a crosscultural theory of values. According to Kluckhohn and
Strodtbeck (1961), every culture faces the same basic survival
needs and must answer the same universal questions. It is out
of this need that cultural values arise. The basic questions
faced by people everywhere fall into five categories and
reflect concerns about: 1) human nature, 2) the relationship
between human beings and the natural world, 3) time, 4)
human activity, and 5) social relations. Kluckhohn and
Strodtbeck hypothesized three possible responses or
orientations to each of the concerns.

3.

4.

What is the inherent nature of
human beings?
• This is a question, say Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck, that all
societies ask, and there are generally three different
responses. The people in some societies are inclined to
believe that people are inherently evil and that the society
must exercise strong measures to keep the evil impulses of
people in check. On the other hand, other societies are more
likely to see human beings as born basically good and
possessing an inherent tendency towards goodness. Between
these two poles are societies that see human beings as
possessing the potential to be either good or evil depending
upon the influences that surround them. Societies also differ
on whether human nature is immutable (unchangeable) or
mutable (changeable).

5.

What is the relationship
between human beings and the
natural world?
• Some societies believe nature is a powerful force in the face of
which human beings are essentially helpless. We could
describe this as “nature over humans.” Other societies are
more likely to believe that through intelligence and the
application of knowledge, humans can control nature. In other
words, they embrace a “humans over nature” position.
Between these two extremes are the societies who believe
humans are wise to strive to live in “harmony with nature.”

6.

What is the best way to think
about time?
• Some societies are rooted in the past, believing that people
should learn from history and strive to preserve the traditions
of the past. Other societies place more value on the here and
now, believing people should live fully in the present. Then
there are societies that place the greatest value on the future,
believing people should always delay immediate satisfactions
while they plan and work hard to make a better future.

7.

What is the proper mode of
human activity?
• In some societies, “being” is the most valued orientation.
Striving for great things is not necessary or important. In other
societies, “becoming” is what is most valued. Life is regarded
as a process of continual unfolding. Our purpose on earth, the
people might say, is to become fully human. Finally, there are
societies that are primarily oriented to “doing.” In such
societies, people are likely to think of the inactive life as a
wasted life. People are more likely to express the view that we
are here to work hard and that human worth is measured by
the sum of accomplishments.

8.

What is the ideal relationship
between the individual and
society?
• Expressed another way, we can say the concern is about how a
society is best organized. People in some societies think it most
natural that a society be organized hierarchically. They hold to the
view that some people are born to lead and others to follow.
Leaders, they feel, should make all the important decisions. Other
societies are best described as valuing collateral relationships. In
such societies, everyone has an important role to play in society;
therefore, important decisions should be made by consensus. In still
other societies, the individual is the primary unit of society. In
societies that place great value on individualism, people are likely to
believe that each person should have control over his/her own
destiny. When groups convene to make decisions, they should follow
the principle of “one person, one vote.”

9.

• Space – Should space belong to individuals, to groups
(especially the family) or to everybody?
• Work – What should be the basic motivation for work? To
make a contribution to society, to have a sense of personal
achievement, or to attain financial security?
• Gender – How should society distribute roles, power and
responsibility between the sexes? Should decision-making be
done primarily by men, by women, or by both?
• The Relationship between State and Individual – Should rights
and responsibilities be granted to the nation or the individual?

10.

Individualism vs. collectivism
Individualism vs. collectivism anchor opposite ends of a continuum
that describes how people define themselves and their
relationships with others. Countries that score higher on
individualism measure are considered by definition less
collectivistic than countries that score lower. In more highly
individualistic societies, the interests of individuals receive more
emphasis than those of the group (e.g., the family, the company,
etc.). Individualistic societies put more value on self-striving and
personal accomplishment, while more collectivistic societies put
more emphasis on the importance of relationships and loyalty.
People are defined more by what they do in individualistic societies
while in collectivistic societies, they are defined more by their
membership in particular groups. Communication is more direct in
individualistic societies but more indirect in collectivistic societies.
The U.S. ranks very high in individualism, and South Korea ranks
quite low. Japan falls close to the middle.

11.

Masculinity vs. femininity
• Masculinity vs. femininity refers to a dimension that describes
the extent to which strong distinctions exist between men’s
and women’s roles in society. Societies that score higher on
the masculinity scale tend to value assertiveness, competition,
and material success. Countries that score lower in
masculinity tend to embrace values more widely thought of as
feminine values, e.g., modesty, quality of life, interpersonal
relationships, and greater concern for the disadvantaged of
society. Societies high in masculinity are also more likely to
have strong opinions about what constitutes men’s work vs.
women’s work while societies low in masculinity permit much
greater overlapping in the social roles of men and women.

12.

Final reflection
• Implicit in Hofstede’s work, in particular, is the idea that there
exists such a thing as a national culture. In discussing cultural
values, we have temporarily gone along with this suggestion.
However, in closing, let us raise the question of whether the
idea of national culture actually makes any sense. McSweeney
(2002: 110), echoing the sentiments of many other scholars
insists that, “the prefixing of the name of a country to
something to imply national uniformity is grossly over-used.”
In his view, Hofstede’s dimensions are little more than
statistical myths.
• In the chapters to come, we will suggest that culture is a term
better applied to small collectivities and explain why the idea
that there is any such thing as national culture may be a mere
illusion.