If I remember my philosophy 101 class, it seems to me that there was a lot said about not being able to derive 'ought' from 'is.' But isn't that just what Herskovits is trying to do here when he talks about tolerance?

I agree that it's good to exercise a substantial degree of tolerance with regard to other cultures. And I agree that non-interference is usually good. But I don't see how we can derive the value of tolerance from the fact of difference. Here's the question:

• Do the differences among moral systems imply the obligation to be tolerant and to avoid interference with other cultures?

Even if we add that scientific methods cannot prove the superiority of one moral system, we would still have a similar question:

• Do the difference among moral systems combined with the inability of scientific methods to prove superiority imply the obligation to be tolerant and to avoid interference with other cultures.