"Inferior" is the tough word here. Some cultures are more cruel, more accomplished, more equal, more ambitious, more violent, more forgiving, more prejudiced, more free than others. Not sure that makes them _objectively_ better or worse?

**Because we are making a judgement of 'inferiority' from within another culture, it is by no means 'objective'. A lot depends on cultural priorities.** - Judging other cultures as 'inferior' to our own feels distinctly like a colonialist mindset — like early European colonisers who saw other cultures as uneducated and backward, and in need of 'help' from their 'superiors'. Of course, on the other end of the scale, it can be very difficult to embrace [cultural relativism] (https://courses.lumenlearning.com/culturalanthropology/chapter/cultural-relativism/), i.e. understanding and evaluating a culture through its own lens. Indeed, some practices which are obviously sexist or racist seem, to a Western mind, impossible to embrace. Sociologists [suggest] (https://opentextbc.ca/introductiontosociology/chapter/chapter3-culture/) that nearly everyone is 'ethnocentric', meaning they believe in the superiority of their own culture, to some extent. We just can't claim this to be an objective fact. - I think it's important to note that we can judge another culture's norms and practices to be horrific or repulsive. But inferiority and superiority imply a neutral adjudicating third party, of which there is none. Within Western culture, we value freedom very highly — and we can absolutely condemn other cultures for prioritising capital, for example, over human rights. We just can't call them objectively inferior.