Because there are many references to Aristotle and Confucius in the first chapter, I think I had begun seeing them as the roots from where culturally different thought processes sprouted from. However, Nisbett mentions how they are more of a product of their cultures than their ancestors. With this in mind, I now see that social practices affect thinking, which affects social practices, which affect thinking and back again; that these factors affect each other in a cycle and therefore thinking processes are continuously evolving and changing.
But speaking of thinking processes, though I mentioned in my previous entry that I started to see the differences in the ways Easterns and Westerners think, I think I might have made that decision too early. So far, Nisbett has compared mainly the Ancient Chinese with the Ancient Greeks. Though he supports this by stating how more than a billion people origin from Ancient China or Ancient Greece, thinking processes are bound to vary among cultures which branch off from them.
As if to reassure me though, Nisbett uses phrases like: "... if the social differences between East and West today resemble those of ancient times..." (44) or "...if it really is the case that Easterners and Westerners have fundamentaly different ways of seeing themselves and the social world..." (45). His careful tone suggests that he is not a black or white thinker. He is bending down to our level, to make his claim as if he too is about to learn something new. It ensures me that he is not going to try to brainwash me, but instead is still leaving me the freedom to believe what I want to.
No comments:
Post a Comment