But
for the sake of it, I'll take a stab at it anyway. “Culture” has
most often in my experience, been defined as, “The views and
beliefs that a Tribe (a group that lives together) holds that defines
how it relates to the world, and how it views the world, and
altogether holds their unique terms in a state of perfection
idealized by its people.” Together, the collective whole has spent
generations creating errors that differentiate this new collective
human group soul as separate, better, and more privileged in all of
its varied ways than those around it.
“My
cow is my temple,” is an old saying. The old golden cow of
definition, is to say that, culture is an expression of faith and a
manifestation of the law of the land. Really what starts where? Is
a definition of itself a definition, in and of itself. Or a pat
answer that avoids philosophy, and defines the prophets and priests
of our state as the legal system. Where there is a perfect analysis
of the one only and most popular view of things. Or a perfect
amalgam of the top 3? How many then?
Really
we should evolve theism of any sort as a definition of state
(excluding perhaps the atheism of communism). It can be held in high
regard, yet it came as a result of consequences over thousands and
not hundreds of years in many cases. And the idea of legal rules
being the sole, agreed on manifestation, of the ideas, ideals, and
soul of a people is wrong.
Tribes
war with the tribe over, regardless of law. They measure their
steeples and whoever wins in the polls, not in the seats of the MPs,
(or other heads of state) rules over all. Cult is of course an
important, and defining part of our individual human experiences on
earth, but can change suddenly and savagely, and has more to do with
race, ethnicity, and personal identity, and modern needs for social
change, than a true Group Identity.
It
is really funny to get into a definition of Culture,
and leave behind your baggage at the door. That is why it take so
long to define the background argument, the phrase and structuring of
the central statement. And in the end we are fighting as much with
colleges, and faculties, and who and where definitions were defined
within a school of study... in so much as getting on with a clear
analysis. I think we have to give Anthropologists at least a nod
here, as the terms they define their field of study as: the study of
culture.
In
the past, culture has been defined by a shock of other tribal groups,
that are more rustic, and one might say “red neck” than other
tribes. (The term “redneck” comes from sunburn often seen as a
lower class rite of passage to work in the sun, combined with “red”
which is to mean, Indian, or in this case, partly tribal.)
As
such I find it easier to get into the stream of a conscious flow and
rendering of an item, if I can realize visually, exactly how such a
thing was created, and the structure that it was created in. A
belief in culture, is a belief intrinsically related to the value
whereof where 90s Anthropology really went off a cliff with terms
like: Enculturation: when a member of lesser tribal
culture joins a new culture and relearns all that they have learned
before. Often this creates a dual culture philosophy, and can in
fact lead to brain damage and insanity. It is difficult to learn to
change... etc.
How
about Ethnocentricism: a belief in the cultural
superiority of your people over someone else's. Possibly this could
be one culture over any culture.
Now
that we've determined the stumbling points, a path forward is a path
through. And along these structured lines I will throw out the idea,
that Culture is as much a Fantasy, as it is a Phallacy. In a world
of infinite possibilities, let's all focus on one possibility,
because not only would that be sane, and the very definition of
sanity, amidst a world of complex and meaningful, but difficult to
grasp constant re-definition. We make these choices, and we plant
our banner here. I believe that a wasp is good, but we must avoid
them, because I hate how I feel once their nest is disturbed.
Chimbawahue had a problem here. But Terrence D'arby was okay with
it, as was “Pink” Floyd. I personally love every animal, and
could entertain the value of good. But I find personal problems with
being able to avoid flies, and feel that this must bring a terror to
my tribe, particularly when they eat outside, and engage in
pick-nicking activity. The flies are not really the life of the
party either, but we don't avoid flies... maybe swat at them.
So
thus the tribe has decided. 3 out of 4 supporters is not bad.
Let's not lean on the geniuses here, they have the rest of the
generation, and their generation of great ideas may one day challenge
our beliefs. But speed, and brevity are of the essence. If the
group does not have quarum it must go, towards madness, and the dark.
It loses points when it can not decide. And everyone who is wrong
will lose social points every time they debate with each other.
Let's just throw a party... and not avoid the wasps is therefore a
heresy and one day we may against someone who keeps wasps or bees as
pets. And move to stone someone at the gate (the traditional
pre-Israelite place of trade and sacrifice) just in case. The
beekeepers union has the most to lose with this law. Especially as
in this tribe the term “Fhon-e” is used to denote any yellow and
black creature flying creature, including bees of all varieties,
wasps, or even “yellow jackets” (as wasps are called in America).
How
can the Beekeeper Bob take off. He has a friend named Burt, but he
lives miles away, and everyone he comes North of their tribal border
someone tries to stave poor Burt in the eyes. Last time he lost one
of his three wives, even if it was his sister which is against the
tribal customs of Beekeeper Bob, he does not want to piss off Burt,
and his union anymore. So call's up weird Uncle Al. And he agrees
to invest, but only if he finds a replacement from Burt. After all
this his society has now moved to the next stage and enculturated a
religious law into their text “The Black Book of Doom” and in
there, it states in a newly minted edition that, “None may pass the
gates of the city who carries a Wasp on them.
For
weeks Bob beats himself up in the mirror. He looks at himself not as
a new man but as a prisoner of a mistaken culture. He can not change
this culture. He could talk to the priests, but he has already been
stoned twice. And this might perhaps be viewed as a pivotal
imperfection. And he could loose his wife Penelope, as well as
material goods.
Instead
of invoking a class struggle, Bob decided to follow the law and stake
out something in a small community. There is a mayor he can wine and
dine. He will probably allow him to set something up nearby. They
can not challenge religious law, but if he is wealthy, perhaps Bob
can afford to have a son who is a priest, who will be successfully
able to change the laws of the land before da-da-da. Legal
structures take over and take this bizarre local custom of hating
bees to the next level and pass a law over all the people of the
tribe.
Fortunately
the local magus is in. And in a good mood. They have a few drinks,
and attend a popular local “Ga-hafta” at high noon, where all
ritual dueling takes place. After that they retire out to the hills. Where Bob
shows diagrams and designs about his new craft, and leaves out sweet items until both
wasps and honey bees appear. Yes! Not bumblebees, or African bees,
or anything else! All is well, permission is approved.
After
50 years Bob's son Mopo, is stoned outside the gate for challenging
another religious law: partaking in the act of moping about. He does
not grow up to be a priest. But the practice of Bee-keeping has been
made popular in the region, if illegal. Everyone loves the taste of
this new nectar, the sweetest of all: called honey. And they don't
want to hear or see how it's made, but it does catch on, and becomes
used over sugar cane in many recipes.
Eventually
the Beekeepers guild challenges the law. And thus religious law
caves after an additional 20 years.
Thus
we see how culture is a product of great and many heinous errors, and
in its way some of these errors will be caught and changed at great
travail. The entire work of changing culture in a way that will not
enrage the locals and threaten, in a very real sense, to make the
tribe of humans insane will work its way through the many systems
which take place within the framework of that culture and all
surrounding cultures.
It
is difficult to fathom through this framework how an alien system can
ever make perfect sense to our own. Also we quickly see the
intrinsic problems with an error-based system, that can correct all
errors in time, but does not have the general will or interest to do
so. A high IQ in this time and error, will not be necessarily,
merely an encumbrance when dealing with a highly antiquated tribe
that preserves terrible philosophies and ideas more quickly than it
will ever accept a tried and true methodology. As things change
slowly, systems of change change even slower.
I
don't see a lot of perfection in this model, and the idea that I have
often heard of America being the Greatest Nation in the world, or at
least in NATO, has always missed the mark. But at least we can be
honest and say some people will not think that our nation is not the
penultimate pinnacle and the adoration of all masses worldwide
globally interplanetary and forever.
The
greatest errors made, are in fact the greatest perfections. And we
should all follow that idea idealistically and never question it
ever, or be thrown in jail, Allah or Great Jove, or St. Benedict, or
someone forbid it. Someone please forbid it? I'm all alone in here!
I'm stuck in a tribe, please someone help me not to make up constant
rules incessantly, help!
