Home Random Page


CATEGORIES:

BiologyChemistryConstructionCultureEcologyEconomyElectronicsFinanceGeographyHistoryInformaticsLawMathematicsMechanicsMedicineOtherPedagogyPhilosophyPhysicsPolicyPsychologySociologySportTourism






Resource rich or poor cultures.

Many cultural characteristics also bear a relationship to the quantity and quality of resources available. Not only are resources essential for survival and minimal well-being, but also for progressive individual and cultural development. Some societies have great natural wealth and have managed to develop a socio-economic system that exploits it for the benefit of many. Other societies are poor in natural wealth but have developed compensations through intellectual development that ensure secure and decent living of their populations. Yet other societies are poor because their socio-political conditions prevent people from meeting basic needs. So although access to resources may be a critical variable in the development of cultural traits, the socio-political environment places limits on how the culture can respond to its particular challenges. The oil wealth of Arabia has created at least for a time artificial wealth, but the socio-economic conditions have proven dysfunctional leaving many people without decent living or participation in decision-making. Poverty of body or mind is not totally determined by access to resources, but also influenced by political power structure and conformity enforcement.

Nevertheless, poverty is linked to poor health and shorter life spans (World Health Organization, 2003). Typically the poor suffer more from harmful environments and the diseases associated with inferior health care. We know for example that malnutrition, a scourge of poor societies, puts individuals at lifelong disadvantages, including damage to intellectual development. The research in cross-cultural psychology reflects the consequences of the inequality brought about by the unequal access to resources (Fowers & Richardson, 1996). That the presence of resources alone does not determine social development can be observed by the poverty in Africa, a continent rich in many essential resources.

One factor of some importance is relative collectivism or individualism of society. Many authors have noted the presence of interconnectedness in Asian societies where the family and community come before the individual in importance. Even the way Asian people write their names point to this profound difference with family name listed first and the personal name second, the reverse of name listing in Western societies. Many would argue that this interconnectedness is closely linked to the achievements of Chinese and other Asian cultures (Ho, 1998).

Triandis (1996) discussed in detail the individualism-collectivism construct. He suggested it could be best understood as both a vertical and a horizontal dimension. In the vertical cultural syndrome relationships are determined from the point of view of either power or achievements. Communication in these societies is vertical because not all are equal or possess the same power. Vertical relationships include those between employers and workers, or more broadly in society between those who control coercive resources and those who have few or no means to defend themselves. However, even within totalitarian societies people also relate to each other as friends or members of a family with more benevolent and friendly attitudes. Triandis believed that societies broadly reflect these vertical dimensions. For example totalitarian regimes are likely to emphasize the value of equality at the horizontal level (like we are all equally poor), while not allowing for freedom to act. On the other hand Kurman and Sriram (2002) maintained that Western democracies emphasized freedom in vertical movement (anyone can become a millionaire), but not the value of equality.



According to Triandis, the population in the United States endorses vertical individualism, and is much more willing to tolerate inequality as the natural order. Living in a “just” society many U.S. citizens believe that inequality in resources is the unfortunate consequence of individual volition. On the other hand people who live in the social democracies of Northern Europe tend to be intolerant of inequality, and set boundaries for what might be considered a decent and minimal conditions of life. They are willing to be taxed (although not without controversy) to the extent needed to maintain the basic social and ecological conditions of life. Triandis reported that the difference between the top and bottom ten percent of the population is three times higher in the United States as compared to Sweden.


Date: 2015-01-11; view: 843


<== previous page | next page ==>
The ecological and sociological context. | Universal values.
doclecture.net - lectures - 2014-2024 year. Copyright infringement or personal data (0.007 sec.)