The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Superiority of western culture
Aldo
Hippo HoorayRegistered User regular
Hippo HoorayRegistered User regular
Some people believe that the culture of America is superior to that of others. This is quite an interesting view, because I have always been of the opinion that a culture can not be better or worse than another culture, they can only be different.
How does one measure the superiority of a culture as opposed to another, without resorting to presumptions and/or racism?
Can one even say that a culture is good or bad? I have learned that culture is how a society expresses itself, this goes from music, to art, to traditions, to language to religion et cetera.
How does one measure the superiority of a culture as opposed to another, without resorting to presumptions and/or racism?
Can one even say that a culture is good or bad? I have learned that culture is how a society expresses itself, this goes from music, to art, to traditions, to language to religion et cetera.
Aldo on
0
Posts
For example, some Indian cultures viewed raiding all the other tribes around them for supplies and then torturing the survivors a legitimate way of life. One could argue that this is wrong or evil, but then you get into morals being subjective which is a whole different debate.
However, it would not be hard to argue that that culture would be 'bad' for the cultures that lived around them. And therefore the cultures living around them would most likely view that culture as bad and try to remove it.
Can you really pass judgement on a civilization that has been rooted out hundreds of years ago?
It depends on what you're referring to when you say "western" or "American" culture. In many ways, our culture is obviously superior to others. Our political culture kicks Burma's ass. Our religious culture (insofar as we have one) is worse than, say, Japan's in many degrees, but better than, say, Saudi Arabia.
It's a nuanced question, but one culture can certainly be better than another. A hypothetical culture that practices honor killings is a fucked up and definitively worse culture than, ceteris paribus, one that does not.
Can we pass judgment on the Nazis? That whole Hitler thing happened way before I was born.
Of course, we can agree that bricking homosexuals is a bad thing, but does that mean that the Arabian culture is bad?
Course a culture can be better than another, you've just got to define in what ways it is better - if we were to say that western democracy is better than most other alternatives at ensuring the highest quality of life for its citizens then I don't think you could fault that, as far as it being a potentially valid claim. That statement might be wrong but its not all that subjective.
WHOA. What? Why? Because the ideals don't match yours? Is it so hard to imagine in such a civilization that someone innocent would gladly die for their family's honor? That they would fight for the right to do so?
We *have* passed judgement on the Nazis, because there was proof that they did horrible in the eyes of those who have beaten the Nazis.
you might want to look up what honor killings are.
took out her barrettes and her hair spilled out like rootbeer
I'm going to be the annoying semantics person and say we shouldn't say "better" or "worse," but just different, and point out what the differences are and what effect(s) they have.
E.g., American religious culture is not "worse" than European religious culture, just more public and more conservative, and that publicity and that conservatism has an identifiable influence on our politics, education, etc.
EDIT: Except when it comes to Nazis.
While you are at it, look up suicide rates in the west compared to the middle east.
whoops.
I'd say that, in aggregate, yeah, it's a shitty culture compared to ours. Ours is hardly perfect and hardly ideal, and I think a lot of changed are in order. But just taking the issues of homosexuality, women's rights, and religion, were not great, but we're definitely better, overall, than the bulk of the respective cultural manifestations in that region.
So we can judge the Nazis (your reasons on how exactly we did that seems rather wonky), but we can't judge Aztecs?
See, I think there's a danger in talking with these broad strokes since they can obliterate important yet subtle details.
For instance: I think that American conservative Protestantism shares a lot of similarities with conservative Islam as it's practiced in the Middle East, but I think that the underlying separate historical trends that have shaped Arabic culture and American culture in the past 500 years have guided American conservative Protestants in a different cultural direction.
Case in point: conservative American Protestants no longer execute people for religious infractions. Conservative American Protestants no longer expect every single facet of public life and law to be obviously influenced by religion.***
***You know what, that's not really true, is it? I think I'll restrict it to politics: Because American conservative Protestantism has also evolved with emerging democratic politics here while Arabic Islamic culture hasn't, the two have radically different views on public life.
Even if that were what honor killing were (you should probably look these things up), yes. A culture (we're talking hypothetically now, 'cause what you described doesn't exist today, to my knowledge) that values "honor" in that capacity to that degree and to that effect is seriously lacking.
No, because I like Mexican soccer better than German.
Seriously, though, now that I re-read it I don't like what I wrote earlier.
It's more like: I think we need to be really really careful about assigning value judgments instead of focusing on as many identifiable characteristics as possible.
This is irrelevant when discussing quality of culture/life... Middle Eastern countries view suicide much harsher and differently than we do here
I'm not sure how what you say is with odds with what I said.
And why are we Godwin'ing this up, by the way?
I think he was implying that honor killings do not involve someone killing themselves over a sense of dishonor.
took out her barrettes and her hair spilled out like rootbeer
I tend to agree. Normative concerns should flow from reasonable precepts, not jingoism and dogmatism.
The debate then becomes which attributes of a culture are the most important to create a meaningful prioritized list.
Then you probably have to look at why you're doing such a thing.
When you are talking about a culture that existed 1000 years ago (or whatever) it gets a little more difficult.
Like the Azteks had rituals of human sacrifice. Do you judge them based on current ideals? It doesn't make sense to.
So, we don't have proof that Central American societies practiced human sacrifice? I'll admit, our knowledge of history is a lot less detailed in that respect, but insofar as we can be relatively certain that they practiced certain rituals, we can be similarly certain about the quality of their society.
Nazi Germany is important because it's easy to identify as a toxic society. Arguments for cultural relativism ("we can't judge...!") tend to fall apart when Nazi Germany is brought up. Nazi Germany is incredibly relevant to this discussion.
Western culture is superior or Palestinian culture and Somolian cultures.
But by the same token the overwhelming pervasiveness of Western culture can be bad.
Current Mayan culture, such as exist in current day Guatemala, is superior to our own. They are trying to avoid our influence but the task is simply too monumental.
PokeCode: 3952 3495 1748
It may not be, and I also updated it. But: I take issue with the generality of saying "American religious culture is better than Arabic religious culture" because there are lots of factors that went into the two cultures.
I think there are a lot of similiarities between the actual religious parts of the religious cultures, actually, and that the differences are manifestations of the different historical circumstances that occurred over the past 500 years.
E.g., American religious culture is a multicultural, largely Christian and largely Protestant (but not entirely!)immigrant culture, owing to the history of European colonization; Arabic religious culture is almost uniformly
Muslim due to the Islamic conquest of the region, and the ethnic makeup of the region hasn't experience the same changes that America has.
I dunno, does it? I didn't make any remark on that.
There's a huge difference between culture and a regime. Culture is so much more than *just* the rules of one government.
Sure it does. If it were to exist today, it would be a shitty culture. If America existed as it does today back then, America would be greatly superior.
I may be misunderstanding something, I've bolded out the part that made me think that you were basing your views on a culture on what the laws are in that specific region...
Nazism was *just* a governmental phenomenon? Government can be isolated from culture?
What?
EDIT: Dude, do you not see how culture and laws are related? How misogynistic societies tend to have misogynistic, patriarchal laws?
It's quite easy to judge cultures. All you really need is one criteria: how does that culture create a suitably net positive experience given its material circumstances? For example, certain American Indian cultures were much more peaceful than others. Being a Hopi, or living near them, would almost certainly be more pleasant than living in or among the Aztecs. After all, part of the reason the Spanish did so well against the Aztecs is that all the other central Americans were ready to turn on their brutal overlords.
This is a totally different question, however, from how and when we should find fault with individuals. If some Aztec priest practiced ritual sacrifice, but was also an all-around nice family guy, do we say that he's virtuous or base? That has nothing to do with judging Aztec culture to be vicious and terrible.
But it doesn't exist today.
What would you say of ancient rome? There are many, many things you could say about them that would make them a "shitty" culture. But back in the day they were "THE" culture to be.
They are related, they are not the same. Culture is so much more. I can find a definition I use, but do I really have to? I do not consider Nazism a culture similar to the Arabic or Western culture.
Sure, compared to the other cultures of the time, I'm sure they were tip-top.
Doesn't mean we can't say they had a lot of undesirable shit going on, and doesn't mean we can't say (and can't judge) that our society is better than ancient Roman society.