In clinical work, counselors must understand how definitions of “normal” and “abnormal” can vary across cultures and theoretical perspectives.
Cultural relativism holds that:
There is no single universal standard of normality.
Behavior is understood in the context of the values, norms, and expectations of a particular culture or context.
What is considered healthy or deviant depends on culturally shaped value systems.
Thus, “normal” under cultural relativism is best captured by:
D. Adherence to contextual values – that is, behavior is normal when it fits the values and norms of the specific cultural context in which the person lives.
Why the others are not correct under cultural relativism:
A. Conformity to social expectations – close, but too general; it doesn’t explicitly reference the cultural-contextual framework that relativism emphasizes.
B. Ideal state of self-actualization – reflects more of a humanistic view, not cultural relativism.
C. Incongruence between behaviors and ideals – describes distress or conflict, not a definition of normality.
Counselors are expected to incorporate this understanding when assessing behavior and distress across diverse populations, avoiding imposing one culture’s standards on another.