Large groups also benefit from the efficiencies that flow from a division of labour, and from access to a vast shared store of information, skills, technology and good luck.
We also see our cultural nepotism in the dispositions we have to hold doors for people, give up our seats on trains, or contribute to charities, and we might even risk our lives jumping into a river to save someone from drowning, or when we fight for our countries in a war.
Thus, we have taken cooperation and sociality beyond the good relations among family members that dominate the rest of the animal kingdom, to making cooperation work among wider groups of people. Collections of tribes later formed into chiefdoms in which for the first time in our history a single ruler emerged.
But if there was ever a species that could tackle these challenges it is our own. In large countries such as the United Kingdom, Japan, the United States, Brazil, India and China hundreds of millions and even over a billion people can all be united around a single tribal identity as British or Japanese, American, Indian or Chinese and they will have a tendency to direct their cultural nepotism towards these other members of their now highly extended tribe.
It is true that the globalization has made the world a global village and the countries are lot more similar than ever before. One is resources, the other is demography. A number of factors have led to this situation, and, this trend, in my opinion, is greatly desirable due to various reasons.
This is helpful for people visiting and staying in a different county. But considering the advantages it brings is we have no other way than to accept this modern phenomenon. It is going to be a bumpy road with many setbacks and conflicts. These days, people can have the same items from any part of the world, use same technologies, construct similar buildings, buy costumes of international brands and develop infrastructure which are built and designed by international companies.
Not so for humans. Against this backdrop the seemingly unstoppable and ever accelerating cultural homogenization around the world brought about by travel, the internet and social networking, although often decried, is probably a good thing even if it means the loss of cultural diversity: The importance of the tribe in our evolutionary history has meant that natural selection has favoured in us a suite of psychological dispositions for making our cultures work and for defending them against competitors.
Cooperation has worked throughout history because large collections of people have been able to use resources more effectively and provide greater prosperity and protection than smaller groups. Put simply, we can pick up where others have left off, not having to re-learn our cultural knowledge each generation, as good ideas build successively upon others that came before them, or are combined with other ideas giving rise to new inventions.
At some point tribes formed that were essentially coalitions or bands of bands. Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience. Around 60, years ago, cumulative cultural adaptation was what propelled modern humans out of Africa in small tribal groups, by enabling us to acquire knowledge and produce technologies suitable to different environments.
And amongst each one we see distinct sets of beliefs, customs, language and religion. Of course, this nepotism is not just a positive force. This trait, which I outline in my book Wired for Culture, makes us stand alone amongst all other animals.
Rather than picking up where others have left off, they start over every generation. City-states gave way to nations states, and eventually to collections of states such as the United Kingdom or the United States, and even in our modern world to collections of nations such as seen in the European Union.
So I hope this phenomenon is likely to continue with more acceptances among people. Each year, its near identical stores serve cups of near identical coffee in near identical cups to hundreds of thousands of people.
In contrast, the globalization, which makes the world look like a global village, often causes the loss of cultures and diversity of many countries.
Besides, this also reduces the adjustment difficulties people usually face when living in a new place. It is easy to see this homogenization in terms of loss of diversity, identity or the westernization of society.
An example is the nations of the European Union squabbling over national versus EU rights and privileges. But that could change as resources become scarce.
The branded costumes, cars, and other items makes people and streets look similar and I think this declines the discrimination in the world.
So, to my mind, there is little doubt that the next century is going to be a time of great uncertainty and upheaval as resources, money and space become ever more scarce.
Similarly when someone had the idea to stretch a vine between the ends of a bent stick the first bow was born and you can be sure the first arrow soon followed. Eventually several chiefdoms would come together in nascent city-states such as Catal-Huyuk in present day Turkey or Jericho in the Palestinian West-Bank, both around 10, years old.
Thus, it seems our tribal psychology can extend to groups of seemingly nearly any size. For example, Toyota, a well known car company of Japan has a lot of outlets in India, which is much more helpful for Indians to buy these branded cars without wasting travel expense to Japan.
For the first time in history, your morning cappuccino is the same no matter whether you are sipping it in Tokyo, New York, Bangkok or Buenos Aires.
To conclude, globalization and similar way to life in different countries have made life far luxurious and more comfortable than in the past, despite some problems. Just look at the outpouring of cultural diversity that sprang up with the collapse of the Soviet Union.
But, the rapid pace of change also raises the more interesting question of why — over our relatively short history - humans have had so many distinct cultures in the first place. This also contributes to the declining of differences among nations. If you would like to comment on this video or anything else you have seen on Future, head over to our Facebook page or message us on Twitter.But even in the USA “melting pot” was never the right term for it, we are more like a stew with various groups and places keeping their own culture within a larger society.
There is no true “American” culture, but thousands of overlapping cultures. We also see our cultural nepotism in the dispositions we have to hold doors for people, give up our seats on trains, or contribute to charities, and we might even risk our lives jumping into a river to save someone from drowning, or.
What does it mean to be culturally competent? killarney10mile.com 1 Cultural proficiency “requires more than becoming culturally aware or practicing tolerance”.
Rather, We are able to generate a wide variety of verbal and nonverbal culturally sensitive responses. 2. We are able to communicate (send and receive both verbal and. SUBIECTUL 1 – WE ARE BECOMING OVERWHELMINGLY DEPENDENT ON COMPUTERS.
IS THIS DEPENDENCE A GOOD THING OR SHOULD WE BE MORE SUSPICIOUS OF THEIR BENEFITS? GIVE ARGUMENTS TO SUPPORT YOUR IDEAS.
It is a fact that our generation is what can be called “The First Computer Dependent. But even as the offerings in each individual country become more diverse, the global diet as a whole—what people actually buy and eat—is becoming more homogenized, and that’s a dangerous thing.
Those are the conclusions of a new paper published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Culturally, We Are Becoming More Similar Across the Globe Essay "Culturally, we are becoming more similar across the globe" Introduction Apart from complicated definitions of the term "globalization", the matter requires .Download