[Ed, you're tempting me to spend time (away from my thesis) to write to MCA
again!]
To be honest, I don't like the idea of saying "one must be X___ in order
to understand Y___"... ( no offence, Ed! :-)
But I would say there are different kinds of understanding, pershaps
qualitatively different ways of knowing/understanding... e.g., would a man
understand what it's like when you have your period and have to
work in front of the computer when you want to lie down... ?
Let's put it this way; Chinese understand/feel about Confucious in ways
perhaps very different from others, but I'm sure there can be some
overlaps...
Do I need to be you to understand you? Do I need to be a woman to
understand woman? Do I need to be a man to understand man? Do I need to
be a bat to understand a bat...? Do I need to be a French to understand
you? Do you need to be a Chinese to understand me...
Oh well, back to my work!
All the best with this intersting discussion!
Angel