It leads to society making premature judgments about other cultures, not knowing all the facts about another culture. Cultures judge other cultures on what they may be good at, and we may overlook different details of life that another culture may maneuver more precise than another culture would do. It can also have other cultures ignoring what is happening in other cultures would not accept any help or conception merely
Anzaldúa also talks about how this criticism of learning English can make one be deemed as a traitor to their people. From this confusion of language, new dialects were formed to compensate on the different ideas of what the language should be. It was neither Spanish nor English, but both, a variation of the two languages. Different forms of the dialects are used in different areas and are only appropriate with certain groups and individuals; some of the dialects are so different that Chicanos from different states choose to speak English to each other. “If a person has a low estimation of my native tongue, she also has a low estimation of me.” (Anzaldúa 136) Anzaldúa states that language is part of ethnic identity and should be a prideful part of one’s self.
Cultural Relativism, a term used to describe individual’s beliefs that should be accepted in one’s cultural but also can be denied in society. In James Rachels’ essay, “The Challenge of Cultural Relativism”, she brings up varies examples that contradicts with one society’s beliefs to another society. She uses this term and analyzes it different situations proving that it can be controversial at times since no one should have the same thinking process as another person. For example, if you were to take to civilizations of the past and tell them to trade beliefs. They would find it outrages since it would be unorthodox to their teachings.
Yes, texts and work manuals contain information by and about people like me. They also represent people who are different from me, though I do not feel they are often written by people who are different from me. For example, take our history books, they discuss the Native Americans, Spanish, Europeans, and other nations, however; who tells these stories? White Americans, none of our text in our history books is written from their point of view. History books have always been a one sided story, and I for one would like to see that changed.
For many years now, people have claimed to be “colorblind” to racism to they are not racist. This is usually followed by a statement explaining that they do not see a person’s color because we are all human. Although race is socially constructed, our ethnicities, nationalities, race and cultural experiences make us unique and discounting those experiences under the guise of colorblindness just is not right. Colorblindness creates a society that denies our negative racial experiences, rejects our cultural heritage and invalidates our unique perspectives. After centuries of giving value to the color of a person’s skin, attempting to push race aside now also pushes aside the struggles that many people have gone through because of the value placed on their skin.
Which is the American culture, this is a diverse culture of many origins and many races do not know much or if anything of their natural origin there homeland or their culture. This is a travesty in itself, for what we as a whole do not know is a loss for all. Assimilation is not a good thing and it has been and is still being forced on people to go with the flow of things, blend in, do not rock the boat. However, why should people be forced to hide who they are, where’s the freedom in
Their beliefs are different in many ways. They don’t believe in medicine. They have many rituals that are controversial. The first topic I will be explaining to you about is the Hmong religion and how it is different to other religions. For Hmong women, they believe in the existence of vital forms embodying human beings, animals, objects such as rocks and places such as rivers, mountains, forests, etc.
They might do some research on the subject, find some sites that agree with their belief, and keep believing that all Nigerians are poor. However this information is not based on accurate facts since the researcher selectively looked at data that only agrees with him or her. People looking for truthiness obtain their knowledge only from people, websites, books, or other data that also approve of their belief. Truthiness is not factual, it is simply a person being stubborn and sticking firmly to their and only their belief. To find the truth of a matter, one must start with a question, such as: “are all people that live in Nigeria poor”?
One of the most common critical issues within a religion is their scriptures. According to Molloy and Hilgers (2010) “Sometimes the texts of the scriptures were incomplete, or the translations that scholars might need to depend on were not accurate.” Incomplete text means that there is room for error within the translation and in most cases; the scriptures could in fact translate to something different, leaving too much room for interpretation depending on the scholar translating it and the people reading it. Molloy and Hilgers (2010) also mention, “Another large area of concern involved the study of religions that did not have written scriptures but had only oral traditions.” This leaves room for too many questions and again, a large margin for interpretations. The lack of resources in the early years meant that scholars did not count with historical accuracy to reference as far as translating some of these
In Jane Tompkins essay “Indians’ : Textualism, Morality, and the Problem of History” she exploring the problems she encountered while doing historical research about Indians. Confused by a lot of biased accounts, she comes to a fact that because the angle of view of each historian is different, and all of them have their own perspective, it was almost impossible to reconstruct a factual account of what truly happened between the Europeans and Indians. She did research and gathering of fact of many historians including Perry Miller, who was blinded with his own perspective and can’t see the Indians. Alden Vaughan, the unreliable source since his racial biases exposed because of cultural changes