One problem, Eric, with framing culture as a variable external to a person,
is that it is possible, and perhaps logical, to extend that dichotomy to
every person. If so, then culture is "out there" independent of every one.
And so if culture is independent of everyone, then one wonders how cultures
ever got started, how they change, and how they die.
to draw upon one of the tenets from the xmca home page it is also what is
meant by "analysis of human and theoretical approaches that place culture
and activity at the center of attempts to understand human nature."
bb
At 11:37 PM 5/2/01 EDT, you wrote:
>In a message dated 5/1/2001 2:55:23 PM Central Daylight Time,
>wbarowy@mail.lesley.edu writes:
>
>
>which culture is (primarily) an external,
>
>
>
>
> There is no other way to frame culture
> However, once a person becomes
> Someone
>please tell me why we were all so rebellious as teenagers but now that we
are
>established within our systems and networks we no longer hold the same
ideals
> Is it possible we synthesized our
>
>It is not the culture that needs to be measured it is the degree and
severity
>of a person's inability to synthesize a culture's syllogisms that need to
be
>measured.
>
>What do you think?
>Eric
Bill Barowy, Associate Professor,
Lesley University, 29 Everett Street, Cambridge, MA 02138-2790
Phone: 617-349-8168 / Fax: 617-349-8169
http://www.lesley.edu/faculty/wbarowy/Barowy.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 01 2001 - 01:01:04 PDT