Nature is diverse. Culture is an extension of nature. The contrasts are made between them have served as a terrific excuse to wander foolishly.
culture is merely a refinement of Natura (Already researchers have argued currents are supposed to as far away as ethology, Psychology, Social Psychology and Cultural Anthropology, but the difference between them lies in the importance they attach to each of them.) As I said, culture is the refinement of nature, or rather, SHOULD BE. I say should be because if we make a brief observation of the society as a whole does not seem to be a refinement but a mere copy of the wild, only now between concrete, big cities and technology. Some would say that culture is the highest peak of the "human development". You should be! But it is not. Start
saying that nature is heterogeneous ... And so is culture, but conflicts caused by heterogeneity, which is a property of nature, should be corrected with elegance for the alleged human development. Not so.
Example: Racism and contempt for the stranger are forms of human behavior that have clear phylogenetic bases, ie lags are dragged from our primitive animal nature. In other words, racism and contempt por el forastero son formas de comportamientos que adquirimos en tiempos idos, que nos sirvieron para una mejor adaptación al medio, en ese entonces salvaje, y para avanzar como especie. Rechazar al extraño es propio de especies sociales. Pero ahora ya no nos sirve como ventaja adaptativa, pero seguimos siendo racistas y rechazando al forastero… ¿Cultura ha hecho lo pertinente para controlar esas formas de comportamiento? Tal vez en ámbitos restringidos y con casos excepcionales, pero ¿podemos decir que eso es lo común? No. Las guerras por credo, territorio, raza, dominación demuestran que el control cultural no ha sido efectivo –hasta ahora– para el impulso natural.
¿Cuál is the form of "cultural control" (perhaps not the best name but we can give an idea) most commonly used in society?: Tell lightly that we are all equal. This just trying to homogenize vulgar to all without conscience or respect for differences (which incidentally, are not as abysmal but they are there). And there is nothing more terrible to do the same as what is not. It must manage the conflicts arising from the heterogeneity, on the other hand, is absolutely typical of the constitution of the universe. Heterogeneity is inherent to the universe. In the heterogeneous nature collide-o-interacts and causes drastically forward or reverse that finally, after all, is a requirement of universal cycle. With regard to man ("with superior intelligence?), The heterogeneous collide-o-interacts and causes conflict if not managed with competence, respect and common purpose produces violence, the destructive side of human beings. And it lags need not be explicit. Violence has worsened daily and will continue if we take more fuel to the fire by enabling a world increasingly crowded, sick, addicted to drugs and environmental damage.
culture is merely a refinement of Natura (Already researchers have argued currents are supposed to as far away as ethology, Psychology, Social Psychology and Cultural Anthropology, but the difference between them lies in the importance they attach to each of them.) As I said, culture is the refinement of nature, or rather, SHOULD BE. I say should be because if we make a brief observation of the society as a whole does not seem to be a refinement but a mere copy of the wild, only now between concrete, big cities and technology. Some would say that culture is the highest peak of the "human development". You should be! But it is not. Start
saying that nature is heterogeneous ... And so is culture, but conflicts caused by heterogeneity, which is a property of nature, should be corrected with elegance for the alleged human development. Not so.
Example: Racism and contempt for the stranger are forms of human behavior that have clear phylogenetic bases, ie lags are dragged from our primitive animal nature. In other words, racism and contempt por el forastero son formas de comportamientos que adquirimos en tiempos idos, que nos sirvieron para una mejor adaptación al medio, en ese entonces salvaje, y para avanzar como especie. Rechazar al extraño es propio de especies sociales. Pero ahora ya no nos sirve como ventaja adaptativa, pero seguimos siendo racistas y rechazando al forastero… ¿Cultura ha hecho lo pertinente para controlar esas formas de comportamiento? Tal vez en ámbitos restringidos y con casos excepcionales, pero ¿podemos decir que eso es lo común? No. Las guerras por credo, territorio, raza, dominación demuestran que el control cultural no ha sido efectivo –hasta ahora– para el impulso natural.
¿Cuál is the form of "cultural control" (perhaps not the best name but we can give an idea) most commonly used in society?: Tell lightly that we are all equal. This just trying to homogenize vulgar to all without conscience or respect for differences (which incidentally, are not as abysmal but they are there). And there is nothing more terrible to do the same as what is not. It must manage the conflicts arising from the heterogeneity, on the other hand, is absolutely typical of the constitution of the universe. Heterogeneity is inherent to the universe. In the heterogeneous nature collide-o-interacts and causes drastically forward or reverse that finally, after all, is a requirement of universal cycle. With regard to man ("with superior intelligence?), The heterogeneous collide-o-interacts and causes conflict if not managed with competence, respect and common purpose produces violence, the destructive side of human beings. And it lags need not be explicit. Violence has worsened daily and will continue if we take more fuel to the fire by enabling a world increasingly crowded, sick, addicted to drugs and environmental damage.
CODA
All people should interact, relate with other (The anacoresis is fine but for a select few).
All people are heterogeneous. We are different (I'm sure the difference is not essential, that is, we are not each a different world to discover. But we have our differences quite respectable).
When we interact with others we meet directly with its heterogeneity, with its otherness and conflict arises which is quite expected and normal. If you do not respond assertively, with conscience and respect for differences (response very difficult to carry out) violence occurs.
Not every conflict leads to violence. But all violence comes from a mismanaged conflict.
0 comments:
Post a Comment