Arguments are never won by those being the loudest or the most outrageous. When an argument turns into a hateful yelling match, the meaning is completely lost. Ideas about Culture start many heated shouting matches because of the connotation of the word. Their culture directly influences the way people choose to view the world. When cultures clash; people use argument to say or show that their culture is better. That clashing moment is when violence and social degradation can come into the lives of people belonging to these different cultures. Cultures should never been associated with hate, including argument, instead they should be accepted and appreciated. Deborah Tannen’s “The Triumph of the Yell” provides a basis for the assertion that arguments should not occur within the discussions of culture, assimilation, and the pursuit of happiness.
One supreme culture has yet to exist because a supreme culture will never exist. Everyone who abides by set laws is the same and is entitled to equal treatment. Unfortunately that has also never been the case in America. Someone representing a conceited culture always believes they must be entitled to more than another because they are somehow better the others. Arguments between culture lead to violence which twists the argument into a hate match that is never a solution. Support of this belief is given by Tannen who said, “That’s the problem. More and more these days, journalists, politicians and academics treat public discourse as an argument-not in the sense of making an argument, but in the sense of having one, of having a fight” (476). Tannen’s “The Triumph of the Yell” describes exactly the illogical and negative tactics people decide to use in order to win an argument. Through yell...
... middle of paper ...
...tunately see the opposite of how cultures are not to be oppressed by each other. The KKK is a hating group that will never succeed in their actions because they are not peaceful but ignorant and ethnocentric. Arguments are a great way to prove points when they are conducted with positive outcomes in mind but no one should argue about culture. No one should kill someone else because of their culture. Discussion of culture is commended, but no culture is better than another. Cultures in America have suffered hate by others but this is simply vain ignorance. The world should see that argument and culture do not mix at all. In fact, argument and culture are to separate things that should never meet. As Rodrigues said, “Expect marriage” (491), cultures have appreciated each other and there is hope for the end of culture argument. Cultures should have cake and be married.
...common ground is not enough, though. Both groups have to be willing to change in order to accommodate the ongoing relationship. Ignorance is part of any race relation and will almost always exist no matter what precautions are taken to prevent it. If a bridge is to be built between the races, people must recognize the importance of differences. They should realize that differences are not something that will hurt or destroy race relations but the very thing that allows the races to exist. A dialogue between the races doesn't imply a need to merge cultures; instead, people ought to see the beauty in differences, allowing the other race to do what it has always done, to live with the differences. These differences inevitably cause some degree of ignorance. Ignorance may serve to hurt race relations in the short run, but it is an inevitable part of race relations.
Historically, the United States has prided itself as the most egalitarian and autonomous nation in the world. Political figures and institutions have attempted to uphold the theoretical ideals of the nation, while in practice often fail to fulfill their promises to the people. This gap between our fundamental values as delineated in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution and our discriminatory practices such as slavery and gender discrimination can be found in competing political ideologies which purposefully exclude marginalized peoples. The framers built the United States for the white man; every other person’s rights came, and continue to come afterwards. Once one people’s freedom is postponed, the same oppressive strategies
In Re-examining the Rhetoric of the “Cultural Border,” an essay by Heewon Chang. She examines the space between different cultures in a pluralistic society. She identifies the cultural border or boundary, using a quote from F. Erickson, “cultural boundary refers to the presence of some kind of cultural difference…A border is a social construct that is political in origin.” (95) Chang defines “cultural borderland as a ‘space’ created when two or more cultures and races occupy the same territory.” Chang challenges the idea that cultures remain defined by physical or even ideological boundaries. She contends, there is a complete blending of cultures that defies cultural borders and boundaries. Chang uses ethos, logos, and refutation to effectively
3. Delpit, Lisa D. Other People's Children: Cultural Conflict in the Classroom. New York: New, 1995. Print.
In today’s society, Cultural diversity in the United States of America can be seen in all aspects of life, such as in the media, workplace, household, and schools. Cultural diversity is defined as the characteristic of diverse cultures, as contradicting to monoculture, as in a homogenization of cultures, affiliated to cultural decay. In this present stage America, most individuals inaccurately use phrases such as “American culture,” or “Western culture,” as if such common and standardized cultures exist. People, in general, neglect to acknowledge the presence of cultural diversity, and cultural differences within the American society.
Temporary inequality exists as a means of “improving” a subordinate to the level of a dominant. After the period of inequality is over, the two view each other as equals. The other form of inequality, permanent inequality, exists solely because of an ascription of inferiority to a subordinate that is inherent and unchangeable. Unlike temporary inequality, there is no possibility of improvement for the subordinate; they are, in the eyes of the dominant, inferior and impossible to “fix.” The dominants, who view themselves naturally superior to the subordinates, begin to take advantage of the subordinates. “Out of the total range of human possibilities, the activities most highly valued in any particular culture will tend to be enclosed within the domain of the dominant group; less valued functions are relegated to the subordinates” (Rothenberg, 112). Moreover, the subordinates, who by this point are under the total control of the dominant group, may begin to internalize the value of the dominants. “[Subordinates’] incapacities are ascribed to innate defects or deficiencies of mind or body…More importantly, subordinates themselves can come to find it difficult to believe in their own ability” (112). This theory of domination and subordination are clearly mirrored in race relations in the United States. Whites, who are the dominant group, make all of the fallacious errors involved in race-based thinking; they are prone to, like Miller describes, hoarding superior roles in society and practicing systematic cruelty towards the subordinates due to their sincere belief that the subordinates are inherently incapable of rising to the level of the dominant. This internalized belief on the part of the dominants, that the subordinates
Dr. Deborah Tannen’s thesis, “we have plunged headfirst into what I call the ‘argument culture,” (Tannen, 1998) in her book The Argument Culture, is intended to pique one’s curiosity. Upon reading Dr. Tannen’s work I soon found myself nodding my head in agreement. How can one not agree that our society is not the pillar of chivalry it once was? After fulfilling the requirements for our last session, I find myself questioning Dr. Tannen’s work a little more. I agree that our society has been inundated with a lack of courtesy from all areas. However, I doubt that this is a new condition. Ms. Tannen has brought to the forefront of our minds the condition that our society is in, and is challenging us to change.
In the article The Clash of Cultures, William Cronon and Richard White delve into “the interrelations between people and their environment,” (11) specifically, between the American Indians and the Europeans and the Americas. The reason Cronon and White wrote this article was, “In part, a result of our current concern with pollution and the exhaustion of valuable natural resources, but it has also proved to be a valuable way of learning more about how people of past generations and different cultures dealt with nature and with one another.” (11)
Thomas Carlyle expresses culture as: “the process by which a person becomes all that they were capable of being.” By unifying people, culture empowers us to be everything we can be. World-renowned author and activist, and possibly the most inspirational woman of all time, Maya Angelou, both explains and proves this idea in “Champion of the World,” an excerpt from her collection of memoirs: “I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings.” Through the use of many types of rhetoric, she illustrates how cultural identities can unite us and bring out many emotions in us, bad and good. She demonstrates her purpose: how culture gives us an identity, and brings us together to grow in places we could not alone. She uses syntax, diction, tone, and other rhetorical
American political culture emphasizes the values of liberty, equality, and democracy. Most of America’s debating is not over whether these issues are important, but how to best go about achieving these ideas. American’s define liberty as freedom, but America believes that liberty should be contained on some levels so they can create a stable society. The definition of freedom is that we can do whatever we want, as long as we do not affect another person’s freedom. American’s want to be able to do what they want, while not affecting someone else. So some rules are set to protect people and create a stable society.
In recent years, the traditional notion of Western Culture has received a great deal of scrutiny. Women, African-Americans, and other marginalized groups have argued that the cultural hegemony has been at best indifferent and at worst actively hostile to their experiences and ideas. While these charges are not without substance, they are accompanied in some instances by assertions that the members of the group in question are the “real” heroes of the culture’s history.
In the end, what we learn from this article is very realistic and logical. Furthermore, it is supported with real-life examples. Culture is ordinary, each individual has it, and it is both individual and common. It’s a result of both traditional values and an individual effort. Therefore, trying to fit it into certain sharp-edged models would be wrong.
When one encounters a culture that has little in common with own, one may experience culture shock. This is a sense of confusion, anxiety, stress and loss one may experience. One of the barriers in effective intercultural communication is ethnocentrism. It stems from a conviction that one’s own cultural traditions and assumptions are superior to those of others. It leads to a tendency to look the world primarily from the perspective of one's own culture. It is one of the fastest ways to create a barrier that inhibits, rather than enhances communication (Jandt, 2012).
Italian culture has a rich history that includes art, classic architecture, music, popular traditions and customs. Many people who visit Italy are somewhat surprised by the diversity of the dialects, cuisines, architecture, and craftsmanship.
Our world is constantly changing and it requires a society that is well versed in understanding the problems deriving from culture differences and tolerance of one another’s beliefs and perceptions. We are dealing with systemic problems in education, economic, government, religion and culture differences.