1. Summary
Culture includes things and symbols and their meanings, norms, values, and beliefs. It also distinguishes groups of different societies. But culture is not fixed and unified. Culture is stable in terms of functionalism, but conflicting in terms of conflict theory.
There is a culture named ‘high culture’. According to this, some countries have more developed culture than others. On the other hand, subculture also exists, which is made by a minority. Therefore, there are various subcultures in one society. Subculture brings people together who feel alienated by social norms and have a sense of identity.
There is also a point of view of culture. First, ethnocentrism looks at other cultures based on their own culture. And then cultural relativism is the view that the value of culture cannot be completely understood in other languages.
2. What was interesting
I learned that cultural relativism has a different meaning apart from what I once knew about cultural relativism. Cultural relativism was understood to be contrasted with self-culturalism and cultural socialism to me. Cultural relativism in the text means that the myths of culture cannot be perfectly interpreted in other languages unless it is so. I was fully sympathetic with this. For example, (Of course I cannot translate it perfectly because of cultural relativism) the words 'puleuda', 'palahda', 'puleuleuda' (It all means blue in Korean but has other feelings to say it.) are all translated as just ‘blue’ in English. In light of the sadness in which the inherent meaning disappears, cultural relativism was a fully sympathetic theory.
3. Discussion
I would like to discuss the positive aspects of subculture in the text. I think it is possible that each of these bonds of subculture may cause concern in the sense that it disrupts the bonds of the whole society.
I also want to know what subcultures exist in our country. I think that it would be difficult to call all small groups subculture. To what extent is the collective culture subculture, and what is it?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think subculture don’t damage the unity of whole society. Of course, counterculture that sub category of subculture is thought to cause conflict among the characteristics. However, Because of the absurdities, conflict is essential, and through the settlement of conflict, the bonds of society become steadier. So, subculture don’t damage the bond of society.
ReplyDeleteI think all group that has people more than three can be a ‘group’. I think it is all culture if there's someone else who shares that emotion. In our country’s subculture example is idol fandom culture, teenager community, and more.