| | George:
Joe points out that "culture" and "people in general" are not the same. He's right. But it's a quibble.
The OED defines culture as: "The civilization, customs, artistic achievements, etc., of a people, esp. at a certain stage of its development or history." Culture is *of* the people. It's not merely the "context in which people live" as Joe states. I mean, the earth is also the "context in which people live" - but the people aren't responsible for its creation. Culture is exclusively created by people considered as a group, i.e., people in general, i.e., the same "people are good" that Joe is talking about in his article, or as in "Americans" who created the American culture, or Iraqis, who created the Iraqi culture. I mean, who creates the culture if it's not "people in general"? Just a few evil guys in India, or a few good guys in America? Nonsense.
In Joe's simple example, he talks about the Indian government, and how "the people" aren't to blame for it. Certainly, we don't blame all of the individuals in a culture for the state of it. But then, when we're talking about individuals, we don't refer to them as "people in general", as Joe does in his article. So he wants to lump everyone into a group - "people in general" - and then unlump them when it's convenient so he can remove blame from the good guys. I say don't lump them together in the first place if you're trying to evaluate them. And call the Indian culture a mixed bag instead of "mostly good" if that's what it is.
Again, he's quibbling. But at least he's arguing the point in that paragraph, vs. all the loads of ad hominem he's heaping on me in the others.
|
|
