The Confrontation

3. What should we do when we are confronted with other cultures?

The question, being rather open-ended, can be approached from several different viewpoints. I will choose, however, to take the world's moral's view of how we should approach cultures of any sort. Often times, we need to find out more information. A name holds much power, as well as much knowledge. It was once claimed that humanity's greatest fear was that of the unknown (along with, of course, fear itself, death, taxes, the Department of Motor Vehicles, and women). Simply putting a name to the culture often gives us a better hold on the situation. There are two ways this can backfire, however. First, if it is a previously encountered or noted culture, certain cultures may bring up preconceived notions. One may meet a Frenchman, and immediately think of pompous, anti-American, cowards. One may see an Asian, and imagine a smart, calculated individual that can't drive. One may see a Canadian, and see them as less than human, due to several negative meetings and interactions with them previously. Plus, they aren't really human so...(Joke)

The other way this naming can fail. Is when the culture is previously unknown. Our brain tries to take in new information in two ways: accommodation and assimilation. The first, is one usually done by children that have underdeveloped understandings. It takes in this information, and tries to place it into previously existing schemas, even if a little off. Its problem is, however, that it can incorrectly define its schemas. If you show a child the picture of a dog, it may create a schema for dog that is a furry animal that walks on all fours. This schema, however, can also fit a cow or a moose. Assimilation, on the other hand, creates a new schema specifically for the new information. Either way, however, the naming fails, as accommodation may lead to undeserved bias, and assimilation only leaves a blank space, with little new input. This is still important, however, as the naming itself brings comfort to those who are trying to better understand a culture.

The second step in meeting a foreign culture is to identify it, not only in name, but also in characteristics. If you meet a group of Samoans, all of whom are rather tall, bulky, with a confident gait and heavily tanned bodies, these are the physical traits one can associate with them. Then comes the less obvious idiosyncrasies that define them, like the vocal “eh” of Canadians, or the inevitable “ay” by Italians and New Jersyans alike.

The third step is to then assume a position with them. Are you friendly to all of them? Do you consider them all the scum of the Earth? Are they to be feared? Will you take each individual as its own case? This setting of the positions, is essential, as without it, cultures couldn't be able to further develop relationships between each other without an establishment of the terms that they met or interacted in.

All of these steps, however, are generally short term. It is the next steps that take a while to establish.

In Orson Scott Card's Xenocide, Andrew, the main character, is meeting a new race that was previously only allowed interaction under strict controls. He quickly violates many of their customs, but understand one thing. Their culture is not to be tampered with. The Xenobiologists and Zenadors with him quickly try to improve the life of the “piggies” as the race is called, by discovering a way for the babies to be born vivapariously, without the need to kill the mother, as the unborn would eat their way out of their mother as there was no birth canal. Andrew quickly points out, however, that the important interaction, in this case at least, was not to change them immediately, but to gain peace. The piggies longed for the technology of humans, which was previously forbidden, but Andrew understood that the important step first was to create a diplomacy between the two cultures, only then could one try to let adaptations occur.