Culture of western and oriental countries

Rudyard Kipling says in the Ballad of East and West: " East is East, and West is West; and never the twain shall meet. " Yet, he never expected that with the technological development in transportation and communication, the Westerners and Easterners that have quite different cultures respectively would meet so frequently nowadays in international settings. However, in a sense, Kipling is absolutely correct in that people with different cultural patterns (including beliefs, values, attitudes, norms, customs, and material aspects), especially those from East and West, do encounter communication difficulties, breakdowns, misunderstandings and even conflicts and confrontations just because they fail to understand each other in their intercultural communication. The study of intercultural communication is not something new. However, the perspective from which the author probes into the problematic interaction between Easterners and Westerners is something different. In the paper, the author compares some major cultural patterns: high-context communication vs. low-context communication, individualism vs. collectivism, equality vs. hierarchy, and assertiveness vs. interpersonal harmony. Each of these cultural patterns is defined by examples, two opposite patterns are contrasted, and then potential problems are presented, thus making quite obvious the differences between East and West and their possible consequences in the intercultural communication. Understanding these cultural patterns or orientations which underlie most common behavior of the Easterners and Westerners helps us to see beneath the surface to find out why people from East and West act as they do. This discovery may lead us to appreciate the rich diversity and genius that exist in different parts of the globe, avoid potential intercultural problems and become successful communicators in the interaction between East and West.

Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 2019

Since Easterners' naïve dialectical thinking, which is contrasted with Westerners' linear thinking, introduced, many cross-cultural studies on human thinking have been conducted, and explanations for the cultural differences have been proposed. First, after examining the robustness of these cultural differences, two existing explanations are discussed in this paper. The first is based on the distinction between Westerners' analytic cognition and Easterners' holistic cognition. This is related to the distinction between Westerners' independent self and Easterners' interdependent self. The second is based on the philosophical tradition of China's Taoism, Confucianism, and Buddhism, which is contrasted with that of Ancient Greece. Second, we propose a new explanation based on the distinction between Westerners' low-context culture and Easterners' high-context culture. Finally, we show that this distinction can be based on socioecological approaches, and it is expected to explain the cultural differences between the Chinese and Japanese.

There can be little doubt that each of us perceive people from other cultures to be different, that the way they do things is not the same as the way we do things, that the things they say are different to the things we say. At a national level it is highly unlikely that a Frenchman and a German, for example, will think they are the same and neither is likely to think that they are similar to the English. Indeed, these differences are the very foundation of how we think about other people: how much they differ from us and how much they are similar. And many are the occasions when people have drawn binary conclusions – right vs wrong or good vs bad – when what they are really saying is that the other person is like me and thinks the same as me and, by extension, they must be right or good, whereas a different person is not like me and doesn’t think the same as me and must, therefore, be bad or wrong. While there is unlikely to be any major disagreement over the concept of difference suggested above, it is less clear that our acceptance or rejection of ideas may be based on whether those ideas come from the same or a closely similar cultural environment as we do ourselves: in other words, it is possible that ideas and the attitudes that arise from them are culturally specific. Using an evidence-based approach and his own case studies, the author explores the concepts involved and draws the conclusion that we are all simply different, needing different paradigms, and that models, especially economic models, are culturally specific.

The article deals with the most up-to-date topic – cultural differences between “western” cultures and cultures of immigrants coming from Islamic Eastern countries. Attention is paid to “visible differences” in everyday life, social rules, way of communication and language represented in English-written literature (novels by Betty Mahmoody and Khaled Hosseini). We compare seemingly incompatible cultures in connection to behaviour and attitudes of people from different cultures (Muslim, American and Slovak). This article also provides interesting facts about selected Muslim countries (Iran and Afghanistan) and serves as a guide to understand different cultures, specific vocabulary, terminology and phraseological units that lead to successful intercultural communication.

Diametros, 2011

The work of Richard E. Nisbett, a distinguished contemporary psychologist, although not monumental (in regards to volume or form) is unique, and deserves attention for a number of reasons. To begin with, the weight of the issues discussed is considerable. The central problem under analysis in this work is: How much do the cognitive processes of people in the East differ from (very broadly understood) cognitive processes of representatives of the West (Americans of European origin)? The author formulates his intention in the following way: The present book will reach its goal if it inclines Western readers to consider the possibility that there is another reasonable way of thinking about the world and that it can serve as a mirror, in which they have a chance to carefully and critically examine their own beliefs and mental habits (p. 19).

2013

Growing evidence has demonstrated cultural differences in cognitive processes. Whereas individuals living in interdependent social worlds, as illustrated by East Asian cultures, have been shown to have a more holistic cognitive style, those living in independent social environments, as exemplified by Western cultures, have been shown to have a more analytic cognitive style. Recent evidence has also begun to show the mechanisms underlying cultural differences, both by examining within-cultural differences and by showing effects of sociocultural contexts on cognitive processes. This chapter aims to highlight dynamic relationships between sociocultural contexts and cognitive processes by providing an overview of research on cultural differences and their mechanisms. First, we briefly summarize different approaches to studying cultural differences in cognition. Then, we review studies showing cultural differences in various cognitive processes, by focusing on holistic versus analytic cognition. Finally, we outline recent evidence showing the causes and mechanisms of cultural differences, as well as suggest future directions.

The Journal of Philosophy, 1965

viii FOREWORD with one another, and make value judgments or practical decisions. For such an analysis, he has been concerned with a whole range of phenomena which might be classifIed as social-historical, psychological, and linguistic. The design of this comparative study of modes of thought was developed out of the intellectual interests we have noted. Each of the four sections of the study is developed on a common plan. First there is some discussion of language and logic, of the characteristic ways in which each of these Asian peoples habitually made certain types of judgment and inferences. In each section the author then proceeds to the manifestations of these patterns in formal philosophical writing, in literature, and in individual and group behavior. In each section Buddhism is used, in the manner described earlier, as a kind of chemical precipitant to isolate those indigenous habits of thinking that are most enduring and resistant to change. Mr. Nakamura is aware that explicit logic and philosophical formulations of all kinds are the particular property of the small educated elites in the societies he is considering. But, if I interpret him correctly, he regards the philosophizing of the elite as a kind of translation into more general and abstract terms of the problems encountered in the common life of the society. And, in turn, folk sayings, proverbs, everyday thought reflect a translation downward or a seeping downward of what the philosophers have voiced. To fInd evidence of how this occurred and of how Buddhist ideas and values entered into this process in the four societies, Mr. Nakamura has cast a wide net. He has combed folk literature, prayers and the scriptures of popular cults, collections of proverbs, descriptions of everyday life and, wherever possible, he has used -the accounts of foreign observers whose fresh eyes often register characteristics that escape the native critic of his own society. Thus, in the end we are shown not only how each elite grappled with the problems of Buddhist thought and belief but also how this process affected habits of thought and modes of behavior in the society as a whole. The present revised English edition reflects at many points the development of Mr. Nakamura's thought in the period since 1947. When the fIrst Japanese version was written, Japan was only beginning to emerge from the isolation of years of war and military rule. Since that time Mr. Nakamura has read widely in newer writings in the fIelds of philosophy, anthropology, and linguistics. During 1951-1952, he visited Stanford University where his work was the focus of a year-long faculty seminar. Again in 1962-1963 he discussed his fIndings with a seminar of scholars at the East-West Center. Portions of his book, certain lines of argument, and much of the documentation have been revised in the light of the author's experiences over the last fIfteen years. It is a pleasure to present this revised English edition to the Western reader. In its pages scholar and layman alike will find a wealth of insight into the range of great problems with which Mr. Nakamura is concerned. He will also, I think, come to admire its author as a tireless explorer on the frontiers of knowledge, a scholar whose virtuousity in research is matched by his relentless drive towards new understandings.

Journal of Research in Personality, 2003

This paper deals with psychological differences between two cultures, with respect to the differences between individuals in those same cultures. Five principles are presented which describe either actual or probable empirical relationships between within-and between-culture differences, and a possible theoretical account is given for each of the presumed differences. (1) The differences between ''cultures'' seem ''bigger'' than the actual differences between the individuals in these same cultures. This relation is attributed to the idea that universal human biological predispositions are often opposed by cultural traditions, so the outcome is somewhat of a compromise between the two. (2) Differences between individuals in different cultures are generally larger in behavior than in thoughts or feelings This is attributed to the fact that it is easier to socialize behavior than mental events. (3) Many cultural differences are expressed in individuals in terms of different default responses or interpretations or preferences for the same situation. Dominant responses in one culture are usually a less salient part of the repertoire of individuals in another culture. (4) Much of the effect of culture, and our impression of culture differences, results from the physical/social artifacts (environments, institutions) created by the culture. There is a strong tendency by psychologists to underrate or ignore the effects of the physical environment. (5) In the contemporary world, differences between individuals in two cultures will be larger in older generations. Cultural differences may be markedly reduced in the most recent generations, on account of globalization. The position put forth is an attempt to integrate the ideas that there are real human predispositions of various sorts and that culture is a powerful force, and to explain why it is surprisingly easy for us to understand the viewpoint of people from other cultures (their ''reality''is often a less preferred alternative in our own repertoire).

This book documents the psychological evidence for the fact that most people from Far Eastern societies view the world quite differently than most of us, raised in Western societies. The author is a renowned American psychologist who first demonstrated these differences scientifically in the 1980s. This research shocked many western academics who had long believed that human beings all around the world thought like them, with perhaps only minor variations in belief systems. These findings show that the differences are far more fundamental. As a scientist, the author considers it enough to document these differences but as an amateur philosopher long interested in politics, ethics and values, I was encouraged to see that the East has not fallen into the same cultural errors that are threatening our future in the West. My essay title reflects my preference for the more organically grounded views of the Eastern world, as our aggressive Greek views threaten the viability of the whole globe. We both believe there is real value from merging the cognitive orientations and skills of East Asians and people of European cultures.