Thoughts on Asians, Koreans and cross legged restaurants

[eyeresist]

Obviously, as you say, anyone who sits crosslegged is filthy, perverse, uncivilised and physically deformed.

I suggest you go back to where you came from and never leave that utopia again.

[knight66]

Perhaps Sean could try rubbing Dettol into his joints; I hear it can make them more supple.

Mike

[drogulus]

Because cultures don't have comparative merits. The whole statement drips of "ours is better than theirs". No it isn't, it's just different. And as a visitor and a self-proclaimed researcher into cultures, he isn't really entitled to have an opinion about their comparative worth, vis-a-vis his own. I mean, what the hell: "American culture is far superior to British, because we don't eat kidney for breakfast. Only the most primitive of peoples would do such a thing... ".  And, for example, the "uncomfortableness (what the hell kind of word is that?) of such a restaurant...", well, just because it is unconfortable to him doesn't make it uncomfortable to them. If they thought it was uncomfortable, they would have changed it a thousand years ago. Obviously...   And "awful habits"? C'mon, Ernie, you're being either provocative and/or disingenuous.



----------------
Listening to:
Méhul, Etienne - Complete Pianoforte Sonatas - Brigitte Haudebourg - Op 1 #1 Sonata in D for Fortepiano 2nd mvmt - Andante

     OK, I'll choose provocative. I don't see how any culture could change if no one was entitled to criticize it. Roughly you could say any culture is composed of manners and morals (leaving out the physical basis). I would think some restraint is appropriate for criticizing manners and perhaps less on morals. Sean may be foolish to criticize either on the strength of a short acquaintance. He has a right to do so, though.

     Do cultures have comparative merits? They must have or they couldn't change or respond to influence from the outside. In fact the reluctance to criticize a foreign culture is an example of a recent habit among many Westerners, perhaps bridging manners and morals, that shows how we as a culture respond to outside pressure as well as internal reform. I think it goes too far when it denies the principle of comparative merit. If we can't change then we will be Ugly Americans (Koreans) forever because that's our culture. I think that is not how it really works. We have a right to change our "ugly culture" and so do our critics from abroad, if they can manage it. 

[Gurn Blanston]

     OK, I'll choose provocative. I don't see how any culture could change if no one was entitled to criticize it. Roughly you could say any culture is composed of manners and morals (leaving out the physical basis). I would think some restraint is appropriate for criticizing manners and perhaps less on morals. Sean may be foolish to criticize either on the strength of a short acquaintance. He has a right to do so, though.

Who says one can't critique? My personal definition of critique involves a fair and balanced assessment of the advantages and disadvantages of certain aspects of (in this case) a culture. Do you, really, consider Sean's initial post(s) to be a critique? Or are they not a rank criticism, based on his discomfort with certain aspects of that culture, which he clearly states to be inferior to what he is used to?  In any case, there is a clear subtext to MY critique of Sean here, and is rather simply that he has exposed himself (well, he would, wouldn't he? ) as a total hypocrite in relation to his years of past posting about exploring foreign cultures. Explorers don't go forth with that sort of attitude.

Do cultures have comparative merits? They must have or they couldn't change or respond to influence from the outside. In fact the reluctance to criticize a foreign culture is an example of a recent habit among many Westerners, perhaps bridging manners and morals, that shows how we as a culture respond to outside pressure as well as internal reform. I think it goes too far when it denies the principle of comparative merit. If we can't change then we will be Ugly Americans (Koreans) forever because that's our culture. I think that is not how it really works. We have a right to change our "ugly culture" and so do our critics from abroad, if they can manage it. 

You seem to be implying that cultures change by choice, adopting what they see in other cultures as necessarily superior to what they have. Certainly this is sometimes the case, and the adopted change may or may not be an actual improvement. I'm sure that the adoption of smallpox by the Caribe Indians can be considered a cultural failure... But "reluctance to criticize" and "respect for diversity" are two entirely different things, and having one doesn't necessarily imply or require the other. Respect for diversity is the whole reason that I've allowed Sean to grace us with his bizarreness for as long as he has...

[Sean]

Hi Gurn, hey you've gone up a rung or two in my estimation-

Respect for diversity is the whole reason that I've allowed Sean to grace us with his bizarreness for as long as he has...

I'm touched and gratified.

In any case, there is a clear subtext to MY critique of Sean here, and is rather simply that he has exposed himself (well, he would, wouldn't he?  ) as a total hypocrite in relation to his years of past posting about exploring foreign cultures. Explorers don't go forth with that sort of attitude.

Well, I'm very enthusiastic about certain aspects of south-southeast Asian and black African cultures, and I can be very critical of England and the West, but everywhere doesn't get my approbation. To quote Gandhi, Of China, nothing can be said.

[Gurn Blanston]

Hi Gurn, hey you've gone up a rung or two in my estimation-

I'm touched and gratified.

No need, I try to extend the same courtesy to everyone I "meet". I must admit, though, that you have been a test...

[/quote]Well, I'm very enthusiastic about certain aspects of south-southeast Asian and black African cultures, and I can be very critical of England and the West, but everywhere doesn't get my approbation. To quote Gandhi, Of China, nothing can be said.

[/quote]

So am I. And Latin American too. Our main difference is that I don't compare them qualitatively. I just satisfy my curiosity about them.  I do appreciate that there is tremendous variety in people, I just don't have it in me to rate the worth of that. I don't like to think that my idol of Sean has feet of clay...


----------------
Listening to:
Onslow Sextet #2 in a for Piano & Winds Op 77 3rd mvmt

[Sean]

Mmm...feet of clay...

Actually I just looked through my file of philosophical notes for something appropriately testing but couldn't find anything tame enough for you. I might try again.

[Florestan]

Surely you realize that they have developed certain features because of how they sit, not vice-versa.

I respectfully disagree. To me, it's obvious that they sit the way they do because their physical constitution is fit for that. Look attentively at the Asians' feet and notice the proportion between their thighs and legs: it's completely different than that of the Caucasians. Now, if you imply that in the beginning they had the same legs as us but somehow they later got shorter ones because of sitting cross-legged for thousands of years, I'd like to see your proof for this assertion.  0:)

As for the Aztecs, their human sacrifices might very well have made a lot of sense for them; just as burning at the deceased's stake his widow and their servants made a lot of sense for some Indians. But it also make a lot of sense for me to state that those were barbaric acts, just as burning "witches" at the stake was. The difference is that the Europeans eventually stopped their practice by themselves, without any foreign interference, while the Aztecs and the Indians would have continued theirs until the end of times had it not been for the interference of the self-same Europeans. 

So, AFAIC, cultures can be critically and qualitatively compared. 

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

the Aztecs and the Indians would have continued theirs until the end of times had it not been for the interference of the self-same Europeans. 

But we don't know this, and there is no way of proving it.

[Florestan]

But we don't know this, and there is no way of proving it.

Some inference can be made, though... 

I'll reformulate: the Aztecs and the Indians did not discontinue those practices, nor did they give any sign of so willing, until the Europeans forced them to abandon them. Is this more accurate? 

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

I'll reformulate: the Aztecs and the Indians did not discontinue those practices, nor did they give any sign of so willing, until the Europeans forced them to abandon them. Is this more accurate? 

I'd agree with that; but if you're trying to make a general statement about the moral superiority of Western culture (are you?), then I don't see how this statement helps your case.

What if things had gone the other way, and the Aztecs had conquered Europe and put an end to witch-burning? Could we speak then about the moral superiority of Aztec culture?

[Florestan]

I'd agree with that; but if you're trying to make a general statement about the moral superiority of Western culture (are you?), then I don't see how this statement helps your case.

No, I'm not. We both know that the Europeans had their share of barbarity as well. But I wonder if it might be the case that their culture contained in itself the seed of putting an end to it, while other cultures did not.

[Norbeone]

How he even makes it past 'hello', nevermind eating with them, baffles me.

[drogulus]

Who says one can't critique? My personal definition of critique involves a fair and balanced assessment of the advantages and disadvantages of certain aspects of (in this case) a culture. Do you, really, consider Sean's initial post(s) to be a critique? Or are they not a rank criticism, based on his discomfort with certain aspects of that culture, which he clearly states to be inferior to what he is used to?  In any case, there is a clear subtext to MY critique of Sean here, and is rather simply that he has exposed himself (well, he would, wouldn't he? ) as a total hypocrite in relation to his years of past posting about exploring foreign cultures. Explorers don't go forth with that sort of attitude.

You seem to be implying that cultures change by choice, adopting what they see in other cultures as necessarily superior to what they have. Certainly this is sometimes the case, and the adopted change may or may not be an actual improvement. I'm sure that the adoption of smallpox by the Caribe Indians can be considered a cultural failure... But "reluctance to criticize" and "respect for diversity" are two entirely different things, and having one doesn't necessarily imply or require the other. Respect for diversity is the whole reason that I've allowed Sean to grace us with his bizarreness for as long as he has...

     I'm not required to be fair so I won't be, not even about smallpox and human sacrifice. And any country that doesn't provide me with a decent cheeseburger is just asking for it. I will take into consideration any Nobel Prize-winning writers or scientists, and clean bathrooms make a good impression. The cheeseburger must be in the package though, at least as an option, or there will be trouble.

We both know that the Europeans had their share of barbarity as well. But I wonder if it might be the case that their culture contained in itself the seed of putting an end to it, while other cultures did not.

     The notion that there's no such thing as comparative merit has been shot to hell. Hooray for that! Now it's been reduced to a form of diplomacy, a tactful respect for the various ways people exhibit their awfulness. I can go along with that, even to the extent of agreeing that in some respects Europe has been the source of positive cultural developments that have spread around the world along with diseases and war. So we must compare cultures and will do so whatever manners say about when it's proper to do it.

     Or, maybe Sean is just wrong about the meaning of these Korean divergences from the international standard, and he's the one out of step. That's not impossible. 

     I've noticed a curious feature of this flattening of values. Gurn mentions Aztec human sacrifice and says maybe it made sense for them, which discharges his responsibility to be "fair" at the cost of rendering his thoughts on the subject unbelievable. I say that because I don't believe that anyone present here thinks "works for them" is a standard civilized humans can tolerate.

[Sean]

Norbeone etc

Korea has a reputation for annoying people, partly because it imports technology from a foreign culture but doesn't have the understanding, or the understanding that it doesn't have the understanding, and blithely tries to use it in the wrong way. For instance Koreans are all non-drivers under Western standards, the build beautiful restaurants but don't know how to serve food, or import bridge technology but don't know where to build the bridge (and in none of these cases do they think to ask or question themselves, making it an irritation to be here): from my notes-

Similarly the well-built footbridge on the road by the school has been built in the wrong stupid place, on the opposite side of the junction where everyone walks, and with on one side you having to cross one side road to get to it and on the other side to cross two side roads to get to it. So you have to cross roads so that you can use the bridge and not have to cross the road; and by the time you've walked up and over the lights have changed anyway, so no one ever uses it- but they would if the steps were next to the lights.

Again the bridge is a technological product of a culture from a long way away that's just been imported recently and its incongruity with the host culture is obvious in the lack of associated insight of knowing where it should be. The thought that went into the bridge design may be quickly learnt, but not the wider setting of that understanding developed over hundreds of years- there's a lack of the finer awareness of why these technological products were actually produced in the first place: it's like a medieval farming community that's just stumbled on some high technology and is in the process of making sense of it.

The combustion engine, the telephone, computer and the rest of modernity weren't invented here and aren't integrally situated in the culture. The problem though in wanting to offer some ideas as a foreigner from that technology's originating culture is that here, order is put above the change and disruption that any improvement involves- there's no space to be a critical thinking, reflective human being.

[sul G]

Sorry, Sean, but you seem to be saying that Koreans didn't have bridges until the west showed them how it was possible to stick something over a river so that one could walk across it. 

Sometimes a bridge is just a bridge, not a culturally-loaded artefact laden with 'hundreds of years of understanding'; and a badly-placed bridge is just that - we have them here too, remember?

[Jay F]

Why don't you just go home, wherever that is?

[nut-job]

Why don't you just go home, wherever that is?

Old Blighty?  O lord, don't get him started on that.   

[Bulldog]

The combustion engine, the telephone, computer and the rest of modernity weren't invented here and aren't integrally situated in the culture. The problem though in wanting to offer some ideas as a foreigner from that technology's originating culture is that here, order is put above the change and disruption that any improvement involves- there's no space to be a critical thinking, reflective human being.

In that case, you and Korea should be a good fit.

[Sean]

Luke, I can see the logic there but it's just not so simple. Here's another example-

One example of being treated as though I have no possible contribution to make or any relevant opinion as a person was when they installed a new large wall cabinet, tall and narrow. Unfortunately they didn't know it was designed to be fixed to the wall and couldn't see its obvious instability: on trying to explain it wasn't a free-standing unit I was asked indignantly 'Anything else?'.

As also with not properly understanding that English has a logic and sense that means it works in certain ways and not others, they don't understand how the products and designs originating in cultures on the other side of the world work. They talked and talked in Korean about my suggestion, getting into all sorts of complicated arguments about arranging the different items, because they didn't understand the first thing was to get the cabinet bolted to the wall: Westerners knowing anything about this would have looked at them in bemusement. Without the awareness of what they were dealing with the Koreans were lost, and like most poeple they didn't have the critical thinking to see beyond their cultural settings' terms.

The resulting layout of that part of the room with the cabinet instead blocking the light from a window was, as with most of the Korean environment and language, congested, out of proportion, reflective of messy but self-righteous minds and irritating to look at.