http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/19/nyregion/monument-in-palisades-park-nj-irritates-japanese-officials.html?_r=1
I am confounded by Japan's attempts to stop the comfort women monument.
Why does Japan officially try to oppose these monuments (this one and the one in front of the Japanese embassy in Seoul)? It is very hard to understand that mentality of trying to ask groups to "not remember history". The Japan of the past is the Japan of the past. Japan today should fully support monuments for remembering the tragedy of the mistakes made in that era.
When there are thousands of victims, many still alive, how can it possibly help Japan's image to oppose monuments to remember the tragedy?
When a mistake has been made in history, and people suffered, it is natural to leave a monument to remember and not repeat similar mistakes.
One of the most important points in this article is when the Korean group who built the monument for the comfort women explain that Japan's opposition is "helping" the monument. That is only natural. Nobody is going to support Japan's attempt to stop a monument for people who suffered.
In fact, Japan is going to completely embarrass itself when people around world (based on articles like this) see it as a country that is unwilling to accept the mistakes of its past as lessons for the future.
As a long time resident of Japan, I love the "new Japan" that strives to build a culture of peace. Just as the future children of the USA need to know the past mistakes of the USA, Japanese children need to be taught the tragedies brought about by the mistakes of the military government. Through history classes and monuments in and out of Japan, the mistakes should be brought to light as clearly as possible so that future generations do not repeat them.
ラベル Intercultural Understanding の投稿を表示しています。 すべての投稿を表示
ラベル Intercultural Understanding の投稿を表示しています。 すべての投稿を表示
2012年5月20日日曜日
2012年4月20日金曜日
When you study argument, propaganda and media manipulation this term...
Check out this article regarding the possible failure of Japan's mainstream media to investigate the flaws in the government's plans for dealing with the radiation incident.
How true is it? You be the judge:
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/text/fl20120108x3.html?fb_ref=article_japantimes
As part of our unit on critical thinking, argument analysis, and propaganda, I usually introduce Herman & Chomsky's Propaganda Model to my students and make sure they are familiar with the forces that can shape media content.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_model
How true is it? You be the judge:
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/text/fl20120108x3.html?fb_ref=article_japantimes
As part of our unit on critical thinking, argument analysis, and propaganda, I usually introduce Herman & Chomsky's Propaganda Model to my students and make sure they are familiar with the forces that can shape media content.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_model
2012年1月11日水曜日
U.S. no longer a land of opportunity | The Japan Times Online
U.S. no longer a land of opportunity | The Japan Times Online
As the US presidential election draws nearer, this issue of "fair opportunity" to be successful and have a decent quality of life is very important to me.
One related concept in economics seems to be intergenerational economic mobility: whether or not children of poor parents have a chance to be successful if they work hard. I am not an expert on international comparisons of mobility, so I'm not sure of how reasonable the article is, but the author of the article believes that mobility in the United States in more restricted than Europe. The rich stay rich, and the poor and middle class seem to have little upward mobility.
As an educator, my hope is that all students can have equal opportunity in quality of education regardless of parental income. I hope the next administration will not tell children of struggling families to just "fight in the free market" with no support, but will take resources from those (like Romney and his millionaire buddies) who have too much beyond what they need and allocate it to programs that make a difference in the lives of people who are at a relative disadvantage.
"Meritocracy" is basically a good concept. Those who work hard should be rewarded. Competition for rewards can stimulate creativity and productivity, and that leads to better quality of life for all. But from those who have much talent, must should be required. Those who have millions due to their investment ability or talent should be giving back to worthy causes almost everything except what they really need, whether it is through government programs or private donations.
Hopefully, the next president will not be fighting for the rich minority who finance the large part of political campaigns, but for the quality of life of all people in the nation.
As the US presidential election draws nearer, this issue of "fair opportunity" to be successful and have a decent quality of life is very important to me.
One related concept in economics seems to be intergenerational economic mobility: whether or not children of poor parents have a chance to be successful if they work hard. I am not an expert on international comparisons of mobility, so I'm not sure of how reasonable the article is, but the author of the article believes that mobility in the United States in more restricted than Europe. The rich stay rich, and the poor and middle class seem to have little upward mobility.
As an educator, my hope is that all students can have equal opportunity in quality of education regardless of parental income. I hope the next administration will not tell children of struggling families to just "fight in the free market" with no support, but will take resources from those (like Romney and his millionaire buddies) who have too much beyond what they need and allocate it to programs that make a difference in the lives of people who are at a relative disadvantage.
"Meritocracy" is basically a good concept. Those who work hard should be rewarded. Competition for rewards can stimulate creativity and productivity, and that leads to better quality of life for all. But from those who have much talent, must should be required. Those who have millions due to their investment ability or talent should be giving back to worthy causes almost everything except what they really need, whether it is through government programs or private donations.
Hopefully, the next president will not be fighting for the rich minority who finance the large part of political campaigns, but for the quality of life of all people in the nation.
2011年9月23日金曜日
My Reaction to Fisher's "Perception of Self"
 |
| What do you see? A vase or...? |
Fisher basically explains his theory that perception is experiential, selective, inferential, inaccurate, and evaluative. In other words, our interpretations of what we sense in the world are influenced by our past experiences, our selective filtering of a limited amount of sensory information, our inferences from that selective information, and our evaluations of that information as important or not important, or positive or negative. As a result, we have to accept that, to some extent, our perceptions of the world are incomplete and inaccurate.
Fisher also explains that our perceptions are influenced by not only 1) senses and our interpretations of them, but our 2) expectations, 3) the figure/ground effect (what we see or are led to see as important), 4) comparisons of our interpretations with others, and 5) the context that we are in. All of these points seem reasonable to me.
The limited nature of perception and the various elements that influence it are why different people end up with different perceptions regarding the same things, whether it is fashion or politics. It is good to be aware of this the next time you wonder why your boyfriend or girlfriend seems so insensitive.
Critically speaking, is Fisher's explanation enough? Has he left anything out (intentionally or unintentionally)? I think one point that Fisher has NOT explained is the effect of genetic differences on perception. One question I would ask him would be "In addition to experiences, how much effect does one's DNA have on the personal differences have on how we perceive something?" For example, some people may not like this question, but do men and women perceive the world differently due to physical differences? Or do certain elements of brain chemistry or genetic elements of personality (if such things exist) influence how we see things. Just wondering.
One related topic to perception that we haven't talked about is "perceptions of beauty". What do you see as beautiful? Where do your perceptions of beauty come from? Are certain definitions of "beautiful" harmful or undesirable?
The following YouTube video makes us think about this. This might be an essay topic to consider.
2011年9月16日金曜日
My Reaction to Barna's "Six Stumbling Blocks in Intercultural Communication"
This is my 6th time to be teaching this text at ICU. It has some limitations, but basically it is a very good introduction to what factors problems in intercultural communication and how to avoid them.
The idea that the six stumbling blocks of "Assumption of Similarities" "Language Differences" "Non-Verbal Misinterpretations" "Preconceptions and Stereotypes" "A Tendency to Evaluate (the other culture)" and "High Anxiety (Stress such as Culture Shock)" are some of the main problems in communication is quite reasonable.
In my opinion, the most important key word in the Barna text appears in the conclusion, where Barna talks about the need for people to not only be aware of the stumbling blocks, but also to make efforts to gradually improve their "intercultural communication competence".
So, what is the competence? How can we improve it? The most important part of intercultural competence is the ability to listen and try to understand with an open mind. When we encounter a person or custom who we cannot understand, when tend to jump to evaluate them as being wrong or crazy and to distance ourselves from them. We prefer to stay close to people who we "get".
To improve our ability to listen and try to understand people, the best thing to do is to try to get to know as many "different" people as possible. Actively make chances to talk with people who you feel are different from yourself. Invite them to some event you are holding. Go to some event that you feel is "unacceptable" or "alien" (politically or culturally) and see what happens. Try to get to know people without judging them from their fashion, labels, appearance etc.
Sometimes the stress may become too much, but my experience tells me that, more often than not, we discover that we actually much in common and you find out that, while they ARE different indeed, that difference is nothing to fear.
By the way, when we talk about "intercultural," many people tend to imagine very different groups from different continents or those who speak different languages, but in fact...almost any conversation we have with someone is an "intercultural" communication event. Even when I talk with my brother...he comes from several different cultures that I don't share such as his current company's culture, or Arizona culture, so we need to assume that we will have differences and use good intercultural communication competence. In that sense, there probably is NOT any major difference between interpersonal communication and intercultural communication.
PS: Of course, don't go to groups or places that are not safe. I will not be responsible for students who travel off to visit a cannibalistic tribe and get eaten etc.
The idea that the six stumbling blocks of "Assumption of Similarities" "Language Differences" "Non-Verbal Misinterpretations" "Preconceptions and Stereotypes" "A Tendency to Evaluate (the other culture)" and "High Anxiety (Stress such as Culture Shock)" are some of the main problems in communication is quite reasonable.
 |
| LaRay Barna, author of "Stumbling Blocks..." passed away in October 2010. |
In my opinion, the most important key word in the Barna text appears in the conclusion, where Barna talks about the need for people to not only be aware of the stumbling blocks, but also to make efforts to gradually improve their "intercultural communication competence".
So, what is the competence? How can we improve it? The most important part of intercultural competence is the ability to listen and try to understand with an open mind. When we encounter a person or custom who we cannot understand, when tend to jump to evaluate them as being wrong or crazy and to distance ourselves from them. We prefer to stay close to people who we "get".
To improve our ability to listen and try to understand people, the best thing to do is to try to get to know as many "different" people as possible. Actively make chances to talk with people who you feel are different from yourself. Invite them to some event you are holding. Go to some event that you feel is "unacceptable" or "alien" (politically or culturally) and see what happens. Try to get to know people without judging them from their fashion, labels, appearance etc.
Sometimes the stress may become too much, but my experience tells me that, more often than not, we discover that we actually much in common and you find out that, while they ARE different indeed, that difference is nothing to fear.
By the way, when we talk about "intercultural," many people tend to imagine very different groups from different continents or those who speak different languages, but in fact...almost any conversation we have with someone is an "intercultural" communication event. Even when I talk with my brother...he comes from several different cultures that I don't share such as his current company's culture, or Arizona culture, so we need to assume that we will have differences and use good intercultural communication competence. In that sense, there probably is NOT any major difference between interpersonal communication and intercultural communication.
PS: Of course, don't go to groups or places that are not safe. I will not be responsible for students who travel off to visit a cannibalistic tribe and get eaten etc.
登録:
投稿 (Atom)