Even though the woman may have looked more Caucasian than anything else, he had no right to judge her based on her appearance. This could also affect the women and she would have taken offence. Andrew bolt took his freedom of speech too far and used it to put down and discriminate other people, forgetting that everyone is only human and we all have feelings. Political correctness hasn’t gone far enough as it doesn’t protect what people decide to identify them self as without being ridiculed. Andrew Bolt also picks on another person for what image they portray for themselves.
Together, these rules are based upon the importance of empathy and this ethic of reciprocity has been what many different cultures have resolved conflicts with. However, the Golden Rule is no panacea. Think about it: “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” This is based upon the assumption that other people would like to be treated the same way that you would like to be treated. And we know instinctively that this cannot always be true, because everyone is different and has differing tastes and preferences. So now what?
People always tend to give negative opinion to this term. Why is that so? It is because they did not have much education of culture shock, thus they will always find themselves reacting negatively to this term. Believe me, if one is being asked about the effects of culture shock, one tends to give only bad or negative effects. What they have to know is culture shock need not be unpleasant.
When should individuals behave according to the groups’ expectation? For example, if everyone is talking /yelling at the same time, then no one can understand each other, so we often take turn to speak and talk, which is the expectation we have in a group. The major negative aspects of conformity are that we can find our thinking change, give up our individuality, may have to compromise group rules because we belong to a group and what is Lessing was referring to as dangerous – belong to a group, but not understanding its rule. However, why some people rebel against groups and societies is what Brooks referred to as rebellion. Youth culture emerged in the 20th century in particular that led people to rebel and reject some of the old values likes gender roles, democracy,
Assumptions should play no part in critical thinking but unfortunately they do, and often. I know as humans we all make snap judgments, but the idea is to push aside our assumptions and judgments when we think critically. Thinking critically is a skill that you either have or you don’t, the ones who have it will ultimately be the ones to thrive in their respective fields. Though it may be difficult to avoid making assumptions, as professionals we have no choice. We can keep our assumptions to ourselves but unless we consider all aspects of the situation we are not thinking critically.
Ethical relativism is supported due to the narrowing view of ethnocentrism, which is causing great “prejudice tantamount to racism and sexism” (Pojman, 25). Society is moving away from their ethnocentric view of the world, which allows for a more diverse cultural of right and wrong. Moral positions are based on what their society sees as ideal norms. The first of two theses is cultural relativism, “what is considered morally right and wrong varies from society to society”(Pojman, 26), meaning that there is no universal morals, which are accepted by all societies. In some cultures it might be morally acceptable to value slavery, genocide, or female circumcision.
This means that people are treated unfairly or are disadvantaged because they are assigned to a certain category that is not preferred. Discrimination cannot only be carried out through actions but also verbally, through written and spoken language. Thus the act of discriminating plays a very important role on the pragmatic level of a language (sentence meaning and speaker's meaning) its effects having even more importance on the socio-cultural level. In this paper I will look at the different kinds of discrimination through language and their effects. I will also try to examine in what ways people discriminate others and how such discrimination is carried out linguistically.
This paper, therefore, explores the challenges of cross-cultural communication from the organizational psychology perspective. Chitakornkijsil (2010) has indicated that communication with diverse cultural populations is very difficult. The greatest challenge is identified as becoming an “effective and successful intercultural communicator” (p. 7). Often the root of the communication difficulties are found in the differences in cultural backgrounds of the individuals attempting to communicate. These cultural differences may impact the “values, beliefs, world views, nonverbal behavior, language, and how to have relationship with others” (Chitakornkijsil, 2010 p. 7).
Drabble is correct to argue that people tend to ignore truth in order to follow societal standards. In today's world it is often difficult to adjust to one type of lifestyle or another. The constant bombardments of outside opinions hamper our ability to choose and be comfortable with a certain way of living. Therefore, blind conformity is actually a molding of what is said to be normal in society instead of using differences to enhance humans. The malicious acts committed by Malcolm X reflect the idea that people ignore truth to conform to society.
This attitude completely negates the translators’ essential intervention in the text. So, from a lay viewpoint since the translators get involved in conveying the meaning of words, they always betray the culture of the source text. This commonplace idea shows the layperson’s ignorance of the translator’s complex task. Is the translator really always a Traitor to the culture of the source text? Does he have to remain “invisible” to be faithful to the original text?