A Topic to think about: Maybe we are not so different after all… Typically, when people compare nations and cultures they refer to many contrasts between western and non-western cultures. The Westerners (mostly citizens of the richest European and American nations, including some other countries who share major Judeo-Christian values) are commonly associated with individualism, independence, and "egocentrism" (i.e., the individual is a paramount value). The non-Westerners are associated with collectivism, interdependence, and "socio-centrism" (i.e., community and society are supreme values). What do you think about some experts’ opinion that such generalizations as simplistic and inaccurate. They argue that such stereotypical distinction between the "west" and "non-west" often turns labels and symbols into "things," a typical reasoning error. As a result, entire nations, that are diverse and heterogeneous, may be endowed and labeled with the qualities of homogeneous and distinctive objects. Using such assumptions, one may not only think that Americans are individualists, but also communicate with them as if all Americans were selfish. Likewise, one may not only think that Japanese are collectivists, but also interact with them as if they all were unselfish. Any given group (or individual), in reality, falls somewhere between the two hypothetical extremes. Moreover, these orientations are relative to different social contexts. For instance, a person may be individualistic within his or her own culture, yet much more collectivistic as compared to other cultural groups. Similarly, one might strongly favor collectivism, but the culture in which he or she lives may be somewhat more individualistic than other cultures. Waiting for your comments,

Eric Shiraev and Gerald Boyd