Comments on: épater les bourgeois http://cultureby.com/2007/01/pater_les_bourg.html This Blog Sits At the Intersection of Anthropology and Economics Wed, 08 Feb 2012 08:43:22 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: jens http://cultureby.com/2007/01/pater_les_bourg.html/comment-page-1#comment-3481 jens Sun, 07 Jan 2007 09:18:00 +0000 http://localhost/wp_culture/?p=559#comment-3481 do you want to take "discourse" out of "culture"? ...that might call for a slightly longer paper do you want to take “discourse” out of “culture”?
…that might call for a slightly longer paper

]]> By: Peter http://cultureby.com/2007/01/pater_les_bourg.html/comment-page-1#comment-3480 Peter Sat, 06 Jan 2007 10:32:53 +0000 http://localhost/wp_culture/?p=559#comment-3480 Another reason to aim for neutrality in the description of contemporary culture is that we almost never know the long-term and wider consequences of things. It is common -- at least, amongst educated people over 40 -- to bemoan the change from a text-based to an image-based culture that we have seen these last decades, with the rise of computer games, CGI, personal videos, TV advertising, etc. But, one consequence of an image-based culture is a rise in the numbers of people capable of holistic, abstract thought. Unlike text, image-culture encourage non-linearity, random connections, holism, and the big picture rather than the details. This is perhaps a key reason why average IQ scores in the west continue to rise (despite the regular re-calibration every decade or so) -- each generation of kids is better at abstract thought than the one before. Moreover, this change from text to image is not the first such major transition in western culture. Having a university education in Shakespeare's time meant one could recite long stretches of poetry from memory, undertake both prepared and impromptu speeches, engage in debates and dialectical argument with others, and (especially if one attended a Jesuit-run college) act in theatrical productions. The switch from oral disputations to written examinations (at Cambridge University, this took place in the mid-18th century) created generations of people LESS competent in all forms of public speaking and oral engagement than their ancestors had been. We forget just how contingent our cultural tropes are. Another reason to aim for neutrality in the description of contemporary culture is that we almost never know the long-term and wider consequences of things. It is common — at least, amongst educated people over 40 — to bemoan the change from a text-based to an image-based culture that we have seen these last decades, with the rise of computer games, CGI, personal videos, TV advertising, etc.

But, one consequence of an image-based culture is a rise in the numbers of people capable of holistic, abstract thought. Unlike text, image-culture encourage non-linearity, random connections, holism, and the big picture rather than the details. This is perhaps a key reason why average IQ scores in the west continue to rise (despite the regular re-calibration every decade or so) — each generation of kids is better at abstract thought than the one before.

Moreover, this change from text to image is not the first such major transition in western culture. Having a university education in Shakespeare’s time meant one could recite long stretches of poetry from memory, undertake both prepared and impromptu speeches, engage in debates and dialectical argument with others, and (especially if one attended a Jesuit-run college) act in theatrical productions. The switch from oral disputations to written examinations (at Cambridge University, this took place in the mid-18th century) created generations of people LESS competent in all forms of public speaking and oral engagement than their ancestors had been. We forget just how contingent our cultural tropes are.

]]> By: steve http://cultureby.com/2007/01/pater_les_bourg.html/comment-page-1#comment-3479 steve Sat, 06 Jan 2007 06:48:39 +0000 http://localhost/wp_culture/?p=559#comment-3479 Many, many "intellectuals" have long held the opinion that only pessimism is wisdom, any change is bad, and that the choices individuals make when turned loose by a liberal order are invariably dangerous and threatening. Any other attitude is taken to be shallow and/or irresponsible. For example, if one points out the benefits to be had from a corporate innovation, then one is an apologist, or complacent, or unserious, or some such epithet. I have my own curmudgeonly culture peeves, but I'd rather not inflate them into moral imperatives. Many, many “intellectuals” have long held the opinion that only pessimism is wisdom, any change is bad, and that the choices individuals make when turned loose by a liberal order are invariably dangerous and threatening. Any other attitude is taken to be shallow and/or irresponsible. For example, if one points out the benefits to be had from a corporate innovation, then one is an apologist, or complacent, or unserious, or some such epithet. I have my own curmudgeonly culture peeves, but I’d rather not inflate them into moral imperatives.

]]>