Logic and intuition, West and East, and the coming of Christ

Setanta wrote:

The governmental authorities of the Peoples' Republic of China offered as an apologia for their ruthless crackdown on the democracy movement which reached its bloody apotheosis in Tianemen (sp?) Square

They did? That's news to me.

Also, I've always officially seen Tiananmen Square spelt as I've done so, but sometimes with an ' after Tian.

To expand on Setanta's contention, I must remind you that in China, there were two opposing forces that would have succeeded to power after the expulsion of Japan, the Nationalists and the Communists.

The Communists only won out in the end because the Nationalists were practically decimated thanks to the Japanese Forces.

Vietnam fell partially due to US support for a Catholic President whom discriminated against the majority of Buddhists in the country; combined with American atrocities against Vietnamese villagers, which wouldn't have happened if the US hadn't sent mentally ill-qualified youngsters to fight. Cambodia... I'm not sure about Cambodia, actually.

Yes, my above explanation is an oversimplification, but it is enough to prove that your contention that Communism rose due to an Eastern collective mentality is pure bunkum.

"MHR" means Master of Human Relations or Resources. I would say that communication specialists, human resource management specialists and social psychologists have a lot to say about cultures. Hofstede's pioneering cultural research involved over 100,000 people and is a classic topic in international human resource management textbooks.

Setanta wrote:

By the way, that last diatribe, issued by the news service at the University of Michigan, was entitled:

East, West cultures may see things differently, says ISR researcher

I have underlined the operative word in that title. It hardly constitutes a ringing endorsement of your thesis. I am not surprised, however, that you did not include it in your cut and paste job.

Wow, and how did you find out about the title? Perhaps you clicked on the link I left in my post? Yes, the article is about experiments and studies which suggest that Americans and East Asians see things differently.

I've found an article about another similar experiment carried out by Nisbett and his colleagues from University of Michigan more recently. This time it was with Chinese and American students:

Quote:

Researchers compared the way 26 Chinese and 25 US students viewed photographs of animals or inanimate objects set against complex backgrounds.

Westerners' eyes tended to focus on the main subject while the eyes of their Eastern counterparts kept flicking to background details, they said.

The study is published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Its findings appear consistent with previous research which has suggested Eastern people think in a more holistic way than Westerners, instinctively paying greater heed to context.

In contrast, Westerners were thought to be more focused and analytical.

The latest study found that to start with, both American and Chinese students fixed mainly on the background.

But after 420 milliseconds the Americans began to concentrate their attention more on the foreground objects.

This was not true for the Chinese, who kept throwing glances at the background.

Memory differences

The researchers also tested the ability of volunteers to remember previously seen foreground objects when they were superimposed against new backgrounds.

The Chinese students were more likely to forget they had been shown an object before.

In their memory, the foreground object and its original background appeared to be bound together.

The researchers, led by Dr Richard Nisbett, wrote: "The Americans' propensity to fixate sooner and longer on the foregrounded objects suggests that they encoded more visual details of the objects than did the Chinese.

"If so, this could explain the Americans' more accurate recognition of the objects even against a new background."

The researchers suggested social practices may play a role in the differing approaches.

"East Asians live in relatively complex social networks with prescribed role relations.

"Attention to context is, therefore, important for effective functioning.

"In contrast, Westerners live in less constraining social worlds that stress independence and allow them to pay less attention to context.

"The present results provide a useful warning in a world were opportunities to meet people from other cultural backgrounds continue to increase.

"People from different cultures may allocate attention differently, even within a shared environment.

"The result is that we see different aspects of the world, in different ways."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4173956.stm

The focus of Easterners on the whole is not surprising when we also see their collectivist mentality and Asian holistic philosophies that emphasize interconnectivity of all things and whose goal is to achieve extinction of the ego and oneness with God/everything (nirvana, moksha, satori).

Hundreds of millions of people may have been subject to Marxism. That by no means can be construed to mean that they "shared" that ideology, that they adhered to its principles.

You've already been dealt numerous examples which were contrary to your generalization.

You've also still failed to adequately refute this:

Setanta wrote:

Hundreds of millions of people may have been subject to Marxism. That by no means can be construed to mean that they "shared" that ideology, that they adhered to its principles.

Kratos wrote:

You've already been dealt numerous examples which were contrary to your generalization.

Those examples were social systems before the dawn of modern era. Social systems may or may not be manifestations of inherent propensity of populations to individualism or collectivism. In the industrialization era however, individualistic capitalist systems emerged in the West and collectivist communist systems emerged in the East.

Kratos wrote:

You've also still failed to adequately refute this:

Setanta wrote:

Hundreds of millions of people may have been subject to Marxism. That by no means can be construed to mean that they "shared" that ideology, that they adhered to its principles.

Inherent propensity to collectivism may have significantly contributed to Marxism taking root in the East. It may have made the ideology acceptable for large segments of population. Actually, I get the impression that there was indeed mass devotion to communist ideology, like there was mass devotion to another collectivistic ideology - fascism. Or do you think that fascism was simply imposed by fascist governments, with no mass support?

Again, you oversimplify. There are other factors, both political and social, which account for the formation of the communist regimes in the former Soviet Union and PROC. I'm hardly an expert on the topic, but can at least see this.

What's ironic is that both countries were most definately not led by people who could be remotely labeled as collectivist by personal nature. Mao and Stalin were so extremely individualist as to be labeled "cults of personality".

I guess recognition of occurences within the West (namely WWII era Germany and Italy) should be taken as a softening of your previous stance.

Let me make an assertion for you to take a stab at. I say that religion, especially Abrahamic ones, do far more to instill collectivism (among each group's followers) than one's genetics.

I've read that Mao wanted to eradicate human egoism.

Kratos wrote:

Let me make an assertion for you to take a stab at. I say that religion, especially Abrahamic ones, do far more to instill collectivism (among each group's followers) than one's genetics.

I guess all major religions, including the Abrahamic ones, have collectivistic influence to lesser or greater degree. In the West, Christianity was combined with Greek rationalism and humanism and church was separated from state. Muslim countries however haven't undergone so much secularization and so the collectivistic influence of religion is stronger there than in the West.
As for the role of genetics in individualism or collectivism, that idea seems to be rather speculative at this time, although I find it conceivable that there might be some genetic predispositions. (But I've never read about that.)

What's ironic is that one of the very same groups you assert as having collectivistic predispositions tends to be among the least religious people in the world. I wonder if the (mostly Christian) human rights activists who specifically complain about China's suppression of religion would continue to waste their time if they knew that even when given freedom of religion, most Chinese gravitate towards agnosticism.

Such is the case in Taiwan where I'd estimate less than 10% of the population goes any deeper than the traditional ancestor worship.

Religious customs, icons, and beliefs permeate all levels of Taiwan's society. Almost all adults in Taiwan, even those not formally subscribing to a religious belief or worshiping regularly at a particular temple, nevertheless engage in religious practices stemming from one or a combination of religious traditions. It is very common in Taiwan to see homes and shops with an illuminated shrine and incense burning to honor a deity, hero, or ancestor. Most families perform the filial duty of ancestral worship; and, on important occasions such as when a son or daughter takes the university entrance examination, parents visit a temple to present petitions and solicit divine assistance. Many drivers in Taiwan decorate their cars with charms, amulets, statuettes, and religious slogans for protection against accidents and harm.

You forget that wealth distribution in Asia is 1% owns 90% of the wealth so communism is ripe for a nation of the poor.

Kratos wrote:

What's ironic is that one of the very same groups you assert as having collectivistic predispositions tends to be among the least religious people in the world. I wonder if the (mostly Christian) human rights activists who specifically complain about China's suppression of religion would continue to waste their time if they knew that even when given freedom of religion, most Chinese gravitate towards agnosticism.

It's true that most of the Chinese don't subscribe to any religion but traditional religious/philosophical values and concepts reach beyond practitioners of religion.

According to most recent Taiwanese government statistics on religion, Taoists and Buddhists make up more than half of Taiwan's population.
http://www.gio.gov.tw/taiwan-website/5-gp/yearbook/p364.html

The article also says:

Quote:

Religious customs, icons, and beliefs permeate all levels of Taiwan's society. Almost all adults in Taiwan, even those not formally subscribing to a religious belief or worshiping regularly at a particular temple, nevertheless engage in religious practices stemming from one or a combination of religious traditions. It is very common in Taiwan to see homes and shops with an illuminated shrine and incense burning to honor a deity, hero, or ancestor. Most families perform the filial duty of ancestral worship; and, on important occasions such as when a son or daughter takes the university entrance examination, parents visit a temple to present petitions and solicit divine assistance. Many drivers in Taiwan decorate their cars with charms, amulets, statuettes, and religious slogans for protection against accidents and harm.

You attempt to reach back thousands of years to the origins of christianity, hinduism, buddhism and taoism--and yet ignore, in your obsession with collectivism, that of those four, only hinduism is not a religio-philosophical system which concerns itself with idividual enlightenment. Hinduism is your typical polytheistic stew, so it's anyone's guess what you think you can claim that means in the overcooked, poorly prepared omelet which is your thesis.

Japan has no such tradition, and since forced to join the modern world by the western powers, has been resolutely capitalist.

Distinguishing characteristics of the Japanese economy include the cooperation of manufacturers, suppliers, distributors, and banks in closely-knit groups called keiretsu; the powerful enterprise unions and shuntō (=annual wage negotiations between unions and employers); cozy relations with government bureaucrats, and the guarantee of lifetime employment (shushin koyo) in big corporations and highly unionized blue-collar factories. Recently, Japanese companies have begun to abandon some of these norms in an attempt to increase profitability.

The doctrines upon which the practice of communism, such as it ever was, came from the West, not the east, and was first implemented on the ruins of the Russian Empire--in the West, not the East.

There can be few better examples of vigorous, individualistic and successful capitalism than the history of the Chinese diaspora, and their ultimate creation has been Singapore, a state in which, ironically, the individual is subsumed in capitalist organization--although always ultimately to the benefit of individuals.

The PAP's (PAP = People's Action Party, which has dominated Singapore's politics since its independence in 1965) policies contain some aspects of socialism, including a large-scale public housing programme through the Housing and Development Board (HDB), a rigorous compulsory public education system, and the dominance of government-controlled companies in the local economy.

Laws restricting the freedom of speech are justified by claims that they are intended to prohibit speech that may breed ill will or cause religious disharmony within Singapore's multiracial society.

neologist wrote:

Litewave, if you were correct, orphans from dissimilar societies would not conform to their adoptive parents' mentality.

Why not? Children are malleable.

For anyone who may think this joker has a point about the Russians, i encourage you to do a web search for "Kievan Rus" and "Varangian."

Setanta wrote:

You attempt to reach back thousands of years to the origins of christianity, hinduism, buddhism and taoism--and yet ignore, in your obsession with collectivism, that of those four, only hinduism is not a religio-philosophical system which concerns itself with idividual enlightenment. Hinduism is your typical polytheistic stew, so it's anyone's guess what you think you can claim that means in the overcooked, poorly prepared omelet which is your thesis.

While Hinduists worship various deities in various rituals there is always the belief in one Source (Brahman, "the world soul"), which encompasses and transcends everything that exists, and the goal is to achieve liberation from material desires and to merge with Brahman (moksha).

Setanta wrote:

Japan has no such tradition, and since forced to join the modern world by the western powers, has been resolutely capitalist.

But still, there are important collectivistic features in Japanese economy:

Quote:

Distinguishing characteristics of the Japanese economy include the cooperation of manufacturers, suppliers, distributors, and banks in closely-knit groups called keiretsu; the powerful enterprise unions and shuntō (=annual wage negotiations between unions and employers); cozy relations with government bureaucrats, and the guarantee of lifetime employment (shushin koyo) in big corporations and highly unionized blue-collar factories. Recently, Japanese companies have begun to abandon some of these norms in an attempt to increase profitability.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan

Japan's government has also been known for heavy intervention in economy and Japanese management style is based on consensual group decision making.

Setanta wrote:

The doctrines upon which the practice of communism, such as it ever was, came from the West, not the east, and was first implemented on the ruins of the Russian Empire--in the West, not the East.

I regard Russia as part of the East.

Setanta wrote:

There can be few better examples of vigorous, individualistic and successful capitalism than the history of the Chinese diaspora, and their ultimate creation has been Singapore, a state in which, ironically, the individual is subsumed in capitalist organization--although always ultimately to the benefit of individuals.

Singapore has a highly successful market economy, but note also:

Quote:

The PAP's (PAP = People's Action Party, which has dominated Singapore's politics since its independence in 1965) policies contain some aspects of socialism, including a large-scale public housing programme through the Housing and Development Board (HDB), a rigorous compulsory public education system, and the dominance of government-controlled companies in the local economy.

And also:

Quote:

Laws restricting the freedom of speech are justified by claims that they are intended to prohibit speech that may breed ill will or cause religious disharmony within Singapore's multiracial society.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singapore

litewave wrote:

neologist wrote:

Litewave, if you were correct, orphans from dissimilar societies would not conform to their adoptive parents' mentality.

Why not? Children are malleable.

You have presented it as somehow hardwired into a collective psyche.

You posit capitalism as the individualistic antithesis to collectivism. When it is pointed out to you that capitalism thrives in the East, you come out with "yeah, but what about this minor consideration" examples.

As for your claim that you consider Russia to be a part of the East--you just make **** up as you go along, don't you? Ask yourself how far it is from St. Petersburg and Moscow to Berlin and Paris, then ask yourself how far from those former two cities to Peking and Tokoyo.