Week 9: Post #3

3). Pick one concept from the assigned reading, that has not already been discussed during this discussion week, that you found useful or interesting, and discuss it.

I found the concept of effort-optimism to be very interesting and within the same boundaries of what I was talking about before.  The idea that within American culture, you are in charge of your own destiny, is not as common as many Americans would believe.  As the book points out, in many other countries, emphasis is not put on the individual level as much as it is put on the family or clan level.  I think that this is one of the core reasons that Americans clash so much with the rest of the world.  We are taught that with hard work and determination, we can achieve anything.  In other parts of the world this just isn't true.  Obama would never be able to be the King of England.  You have to be born into that kind of fortune, but in the United States we are taught that anyone can be anything they want to be.  

Week 9: Post #2

2). Do you believe in the rationality, perfectibility, and mutability premises? What social institutions and practices are based on these beliefs?

Of the three premises covered in chapter 12 in the textbook, I only truly believe in one of them and partially in another.  The premise that I do not believe in is the perfectibility premise.  The book puts it as based on the old Puritan idea that humans are born in sim but are capable of achieving goodness through effort and control.  I do not agree with this notion at all because I believe in nurture much more than nature.  Institutions that follow this premise would be religious institutions.  This might also be a reason why I don't follow this premise, since I am not a particularly religious person.  This brings me to the next premise that I believe in: mutability premise.  The books states that this premise assumes that human behavior is shaped by environmental factors and that the way to improve humans is to improve their physical and psychological circumstances.  Institutions that follow this premise are educational ones.  The book says that a belief in universal education follows this assumption.  I believe that we can always find a way to overcome.  The premise that I have mixed feelings about is the rationality premise.  I want to believe that most people are capable of discovering the truth through logical analysis, but I am not sure all of us are.  The institutions that prove this premise are the majority of institutions set up in this country such as democracy, trial by jury, etc.  I think there is a lot of truth to this premise but not with everyone, which is why I can't commit to say I agree with it completely.  

Week 9: Post #1

1). Do you agree with anthropologist Ruth Benedict that we are "creatures of our culture" and that our habits, beliefs, and impossibilities are shaped by our culture? If so, how can we break through the limits of our cultures?

I absolutely agree with Ruth Benedict in that we are "creatures of our culture"!  I find this idea very interesting and obvious at the same time.  Just today I was watching Oprah with my mom and she was doing a show on different women throughout the world.  She followed women in different countries and profiled their day-to-day lives as well as specific cultural norms.  A large portion of the program focused on Copenhagen in Denmark.  The women that were profiled in Copenhagen stressed the simplistic lifestyle, the free health care, the free education, etc.  The show also mentioned that in a recent study, Danish people are the happiest people in the world. 

While watching this program, I couldn't help but feel a little pessimistic.  This would never work in the United States.  Our core values are just too different for us to ever be able to emulate this country.  I want free health care and free education but I also like working hard and reaping the benefits.  I love the benefits of socialistic views (like Denmark's) but I am a materialistic American girl from a capitalistic country.  

The women from Denmark couldn't understand the need for all of our "stuff", I have a hard time imagining life without all of the "stuff".  I think the differences in cultures are so embedded in our brains that they become second nature and it isn't until we experience difference that we understand that there are other ways of living.  I think the only way to break the limits of our own culture is to experience others.  We need to investigate what is important in life, which can vary from person to person, but only when we experience difference will we understand what we really have.  

Week 7: Post #3

3). Pick one concept from the assigned reading, that has not already been discussed this week, that you found useful or interesting and discuss it.

One area that I found particularly true in this chapter was the emotional expression part.  The book says that nonverbal is more effective than verbal communication in emotional expression.  A comforting hug or a nice touch is always better than someone telling me it is going to be okay.  Emotions need more than just verbal communication because the nonverbal is what let the emotions shine through.  Tears can show that one is sad.  A smile can show that one is happy.  A wrinkled brow can indicate some anger.  All of the these things help communicate nonverbally.  My boyfriend happens to think that I like to communicate more with my face than I actually do with my words.  He thinks he can read my like a book.  I am not sure at how accurate he really is at that, but he does seem to know when I am angry, or upset.  

Week 7: Post #2

2). Although nonverbal messages are more universal than verbal messages, nonverbals do not always carry the same meanings in other cultures. Can you give examples of some of the nonverbal displays that take on different meanings in other countries? If you have moved around within this country, have you ever encountered regional differences in nonverbal meaning?

My boyfriend has been lucky enough to do quite a bit of traveling at such a young age.  With that experience he has been able to meet lots of different people from different places.  He has experienced this very idea while traveling.  Many countries have different context for nonverbal messages.  While traveling he happened to give a simple thumbs-up.  He was showing the people that whatever he was talking about was cool.  However, when he did so, one of the people he was with asked him what he was doing in a kind of insulted way.  When He explained what it meant, the other boy started to laugh.  The other boy explained to my boyfriend giving a thumbs up where he was from (Iran) was the equivalent of flipping someone off.  Regional differences also occur within this country.  In Hawaii, you see people making the "hang loose" symbol with their hands.  In rock and roll you see a lot of people making the "rock on" symbol with their hands.  In all these cases hand symbols which is a form of nonverbal communication, can mean different things to different people. 

Week 7: Post #1

1). Because nonverbal messages can be ambiguous, they are open to misinterpretation. Have you ever been wrong about the meaning of someones nonverbal message? Describe what happened. How can people increase the accuracy with which they interpret nonverbal message?

Because nonverbal messages are open to interpretation for the most part, I have unfortunately been a victim of misinterpreting nonverbal messages before.  One specific time was very hostile with some old friends of mine.  I was sitting with a couple of my friends at a party.  We were laughing a lot about some silly house decorations that were there at for party across the room from where my group was huddled.  We kept on turning towards them, saying another silly joke and then burst into laughter again.  What we didn't realize was that another one of our friends was near those decorations and had been that entire time.  When she came over to us and was really upset we were all so confused.  She had to explain to us what she saw until we were able to figure out the mix up.  She thought that we were all making fun of her when we were all laughing.  She saw us all turning around staring and laughing in her direction, and thought it was aimed at her.  Once we were able to explain, everything was okay, but with the misinterpretation of nonverbal communication, we can see why this happened.  In the future, I think I need to remember to be very aware of all of my surroundings.  If I am on the receiving end I also need to remember to not jump to conclusions.  With those ideas in mind, maybe the interpretation of nonverbal communication can be more accurate. 

Week 6: Post #3

3). Pick on concept from the assigned reading, not already discussed, that you found useful or interesting and discuss it.

Identifying loaded language was a particularly interesting passage in the assigned reading for me.  "God terms are terms that are so positive that they go unchallenged; devil terms express negative values and repel the listener" (pg. 57).  I wouldn't necessarily use those terms to describe that kind of behavior, however, I do believe that that language exists, and is actually very prevalent. For example, when lawyers are questioning witnesses, they will phrase a question in a particular way to get a particular response out of the witness.  When you are arguing with someone you might also use the same tactic.  When you are trying to convince someone to do something, you might describe it in a way that it is impossible to say no to.  These are all examples of loaded language.  They always have an alternative motive or a hidden agenda.  I think that loaded language is used in a way that is not always fair to all participants.  In this situation, I think it can be cruel.  However, one can usually figure out when loaded language is being used and answer honestly, and truthful to oneself, not according to the loaded language.

Week 6: Post #2

2). Do you agree that men and women use language differently? In what areas?

I think that men and women use language the same as far as context, but as when comparing content, men and women differ in a large way.  For example, I think that if a group of men and a group of women were to have the exact same conversation, I think that the groups would have completely different views about what was said and their feelings about the conversation that transpired.  

Unfortunately, I think women have a tendency to be more invested in the conversation at hand then men do.  This is not to say that men don't have strong feelings or that one group is more emotional than the other, because I personally do not buy that argument; I think men can be just as emotional as women, they just may not manifest those emotions in a different way than women.  I just think that women tend to hold people more accountable on thing that are said in a casual conversation than most men would.  

Week 6: Post #1

1). Is it possible to perceive others without judging or categorizing them? If so, how? If not, how can we make the judgments we do make, more fair?

I would like to think that it is possible to perceive others without judging or categorizing them, however, I think it is human nature to want "understand" people.  And by understand people, I don't mean that perceiver is correctly perceiving others, but rather judging or categorizing them in a way that makes them comfortable.  The perceivers could really know absolutely nothing about the observed, but if they were able to come to a conclusion that would explain their behavior, traits, etc., then that is all the perceiver needs to know.  

I think that a way to make judgement and categorization more fair is for the perceivers to actually be interested in knowing others.  They can actually ask questions and listen to the answers.  They can let their opinion be molded as much as possible by the person they are forming their opinion about.  We will still always have our own biases and judge others on preconceived notions, but we will have a better chance to actually know the other person.