I found couple ideas from chapter 5 interesting for me. The first one is idea of Ethnocentrism (p.341).

 It is so funny to observe how people from different cultures think they are superior to all others. I remember how during the Soviet Union people in Russia had been taught that to think that they are the smartest nation in the world. The worst thing was that people were not allowed to go abroad. Everyone who would dare to doubt correctness of socialism could end up so far from civilization. I used to think that ethnocentrism among Slavik nations was caused by political ideology. Even now, after more then 20 years as the Soviet Union has been eliminated, people still try to prove that they are better then other. It is so funny to read Russian news when they tell stories about USA and what's going on here. The same event can be presented in completely opposite ways. At the same time, ethnocentrism is of the key element in any ideology or idea of nation. By allowing people to consider themselves superior we get patriots, desire for improvement and so on. Competition helps us do not stay at the same place, but move forward. 

The second idea that caught my attention was idea of Personal Predisposition (344). Everyone who moved to a new culture knows how big is temptation to go back, especially when everything goes not well at the moment. All the time talks about going back circulate among immigrants from Russia or Ukraine. In most case older people live every day with dream to go back. People, who have lived in the US for more than 10 years still dreaming to go back home, but just few of them recognize that it is impossible to turn back. Within years everything is changing, there is no more homeland, one as it used to be 10 years ago. Everyone, who migrated to America is considered as American by those who stayed in homeland. Some people tried to go back, but they were very disappointed, because they had returned to a different country with a new culture. I think that every place is good enough to live at, as long as we predispose ourselves to think so. 

Three premises - three applications...

Each of three premises that author discus on page 334 legitimate and should be considered as a key factor to build our culture. I do believe in the rationality premise. As a Christian I do see that most people are capable of discovering the truth through logical analysis. Apostle Paul in his letter to Roman church in says:

“…because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.

                                      Romans 1:19-20

I clearly see that God had given us, human capability to see our world was created by God, and we can see it through observing creation. Logical analysis is a crucial element here for human nature. It makes us capable of discovering God by observing our world, nature and every creation. Here is why this premise “underlies many American institutions, including democracy, trial by jury, and free enterprise”.

The perfectibility premise is legit as for me, because I do believe that every human is born in sin, and we are capable of achieving goodness through effort and control. Human history contains many examples of those who followed this rule and had achieved what they believe in. For example, John Calvin and his practice in Geneva showed that perfectibility premise works, but at the same time achieving goodness and perfection are two different concepts.

The mutability premise is worth to be believed in. From my own perspective I see how true is it, when I analyze how people have changed since economic downturn hit our country. Just think about how store policies and security were changed since people steal more. During economic growth, more jobs were available, so people could count on stable income, which empowered them to buy what they needed. So is human behavior shaped by environmental factors? I think it is rhetorical question… 

  

We all different...

 

I do agree with anthropologist Ruth Benedict that we are “creatures of our culture” and our habits, beliefs, and impossibilities are shaped by our culture. I got a chance to live through such experience. One of advantages to be immigrant is that you can observe pro and cons in your own culture and also in a culture you have moved in. Some time ago I mentioned how difficult for Slavic Christians was to accept American missionaries who would sit at church by putting heel on his knee. Another example would be an attitude to wearing heat inside building. In Russia it is not acceptable for men to wear heat inside building, when here it is completely fine.  

I don’t really think that we should break through the limits of our cultures. However, if we come to the point where it is necessary to break through the limits, we have to identify how curtail feature is. There are some values that cannot be betrayed even though those can be cultural things. 

One concept that I found very interested was an idea of territories. In some way I would like to connect this post with a previous one, where we discussed difference in interpreting nonverbal messages within various cultures. At some point how different are people in identifying their territories. About 10 years ago I met a young man, his name was Tim and he came to Ukraine with his father for business. It happened that we became friends. So one day we took a walk around the city. While we were walking we started to talk and as long as street was pretty crowded I tried to stay as close as possible. At the same time I noticed that every time I was attempting to get closer, Tim was trying to avoid being close. Later my friend told me that I was too close, because for there were culturally accepted boundaries or ideas how close friends could stay. For me it was real discovery. 

Later I caught myself observing how close I did stay with my friends and fellows. For example, I stayed pretty close with my best friend, when I couldn't feel comfortable staying too close with my roommates. I think that by observing distance between us and people with whom we communicate, we can conclude how close we are. Going back to story with Tim, when I tried to stay too close I'm smiling now. How silly did I look to him? I can only guess what he might thought in that regard...

Be careful with fingers!!!

I don't really remember any experience being in trouble because of any hands gesture that meant something different in America than in Russia or Ukraine. There was a story I heard once. In the begging of 1990's a lot of people from Ukraine went to Eastern European countries to resell some stuff and thus make some money for living. So one man just got to Bulgaria, where he had to change a train or was returning back, but he was not familiar that "Yes" means "No" and vice-versa. That guy was late for train, and while running and looking for his train he asked someone if the one he just ran by was going to where he needed, so person nodded his head up and down. That guy just jumped in the train and already was accelerating. Only late in conversation he found out that he was going in the opposite direction. Later he made a discovery for himself, in Bulgaria shaking you head left to right means "YES", while nodding your head us and down means "NO"

Here is a video I found interesting and informative on our subject. 

However, there are couple things that I am not agree with. First, in Russia thumb-up doesn't have any offensive meaning, as long as  "ok" sign. I've spent more than 5 years living in Russia and never had a problem with "ok" sign. It is possible that for last couple years something has changed, but really doubt that changes could be so significant. 

Be careful, girls!!!

I really doubt that there is a person in this world who would never misinterpret nonverbal messages intended or not. Unfortunately I don’t remember any bright story when I would attach different meaning to a message. However, I had one story in my life where I played a role of an unintended nonverbal messenger. I happened when I was about 18 years old. There was a girl in our church. It happened that our glances met few times, so she considered it as a kind of beginning for new relationship. The paradox of this story was that I just started dating my wife, at that time we were just a boyfriend and a girlfriend.  As it usually happens, somebody told my girlfriend (she is my lovely wife now) that I’m seeing that other girl, bringing her flower and other things. You probably can imagine what happened after… Fortunately that accident had not influenced relationship with my wife, and the only way to resolve that issue was to talk to the other girl. This story might sound silly, but it is what it is. I believe that the only way to increase the accuracy with people interpret nonverbal messages is turn those to verbal messages and talk.