Tunnel Vision in Western Thought?

S.A.M.

uniquely dreadful
Valued Senior Member
As far as I can tell, S.A.M.'s ideas about Native Americans (and many other aspects of America besides) are mostly extrapolations/projections of her ideas about other issues (European colonialism, the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, the Holocaust, Apartheid, etc.). Note that she rarely addresses the subject on its own terms, rather than as a rhetorical bludgeon when discussing one of her pet issues (like in this thread).

Predictably, this makes for something of a muddle.

How would you address the subject on its own terms? By dissociating it from all other forms of segregation, ethnic cleansing and colonialism?

You may be interested in a book called "The Geography of thought"

review of The Geography of Thought said:
Westerners tend to inculcate individualism and choice (40 breakfast cereals at the supermarket), while East Asians are oriented toward group relations and obligations ("the tall poppy is cut down" remains a popular Chinese aphorism)

Next, Nisbett presents his actual experiments and data, many of which measure reaction times in recalling previously shown objects. They seem to show East Asians (a term Nisbett uses as a catch-all for Chinese, Koreans, Japanese and others) measurably more holistic in their perceptions (taking in whole scenes rather than a few stand-out objects). Westerners, or those brought up in Northern European and Anglo-Saxon-descended cultures, have a "tunnel-vision perceptual style" that focuses much more on identifying what's prominent in certain scenes and remembering it

Does western thinking suffer from tunnel vision?

Are they unable to make holistic connections in thought? Can they simply not see the big picture?
 
How would you address the subject on its own terms? By dissociating it from all other forms of segregation, ethnic cleansing and colonialism?

You may be interested in a book called "The Geography of thought"



Does western thinking suffer from tunnel vision?

Are they unable to make holistic connections in thought? Can they simply not see the big picture?
Does eastern thinking suffer from over generalization? Can they simply not spot what's important and focus on that?
 
Does eastern thinking suffer from over generalization? Can they simply not spot what's important and focus on that?

Like what? Give me an example of what is important that they are generalising due to loss of focus? The economy? War on terror? :p
 
"the tall poppy is cut down" remains a popular Chinese aphorism
We have that saying as well and it's used often to describe things that happen in my society.

On a side-note: I found this allegory describing the saying.

"There is an old Native American joke: a man was walking by with two buckets full of crabs. Every few feet, the man would have to stop and put back in the crabs that had climbed out of one of the buckets. He didn’t have the problem with one of the buckets, the crabs all stayed in. But the crabs in the other one just kept getting out. Someone watching asked why one bucket of crabs stayed in and the other one didn’t. The man replied, “One is a bucket of white crabs. They climb on each other and get to the top and over the edge. The other is a bucket of Indian crabs (”In-dans” to us, “native Americans” to you). Everytime one of the crabs gets up a bit, another one pulls him back down to the bottom.”"
http://dangerousintersection.org/2006/12/07/if-women-ruled-the-world/#comment-9014

:p
 
We have that saying as well and it's used often to describe things that happen in my society.

On a side-note: I found this allegory describing the saying.

"There is an old Native American joke: a man was walking by with two buckets full of crabs. Every few feet, the man would have to stop and put back in the crabs that had climbed out of one of the buckets. He didn’t have the problem with one of the buckets, the crabs all stayed in. But the crabs in the other one just kept getting out. Someone watching asked why one bucket of crabs stayed in and the other one didn’t. The man replied, “One is a bucket of white crabs. They climb on each other and get to the top and over the edge. The other is a bucket of Indian crabs (”In-dans” to us, “native Americans” to you). Everytime one of the crabs gets up a bit, another one pulls him back down to the bottom.”"
http://dangerousintersection.org/2006/12/07/if-women-ruled-the-world/#comment-9014

:p

We have the same allegory in a different form.

Q: Why don't jails in India worry about prisoners escaping?

Ans: Everytime a prisoner tries to escape, the others pull him back in. :)
 
We have the same allegory in a different form.

Q: Why don't jails in India worry about prisoners escaping?

Ans: Everytime a prisoner tries to escape, the others pull him back in. :)

But but.. then you agree that its not a good thing to cut down the tall poppy?
 

The white crabs get out by cooperating while the Native American crabs pull each other down and never achieve anything.. (I don't mean to be racist here, I'm just following the analogy).
 
We have that saying as well and it's used often to describe things that happen in my society.

On a side-note: I found this allegory describing the saying.

"There is an old Native American joke: a man was walking by with two buckets full of crabs. Every few feet, the man would have to stop and put back in the crabs that had climbed out of one of the buckets. He didn’t have the problem with one of the buckets, the crabs all stayed in. But the crabs in the other one just kept getting out. Someone watching asked why one bucket of crabs stayed in and the other one didn’t. The man replied, “One is a bucket of white crabs. They climb on each other and get to the top and over the edge. The other is a bucket of Indian crabs (”In-dans” to us, “native Americans” to you). Everytime one of the crabs gets up a bit, another one pulls him back down to the bottom.”"
http://dangerousintersection.org/2006/12/07/if-women-ruled-the-world/#comment-9014

:p

The bucket of Indian Crabs did not want to go anyware or do anything cause they get there Welfare check on a regular basis.
 
The white crabs get out by cooperating while the Native American crabs pull each other down and never achieve anything.. (I don't mean to be racist here, I'm just following the analogy).

And what do the white crabs achieve?
 
SAM said:
How would you address the subject on its own terms? By dissociating it from all other forms of segregation, ethnic cleansing and colonialism?
No.
 
Last edited:
By making it unique? By looking at distinguishing rather than common features?
 
Is a rhetorical question premised on a misreading of a science text a sufficient cover for racial bigotry?

Hmm what is racial bigotry? Seeing common trends or distinguishing features?

This may be an interesting window to racial bigotry btw. Does looking for distinguishing features increase susceptibility to bigotry?
 
SAM said:
By making it unique? By looking at distinguishing rather than common features?
- - - -
This may be an interesting window to racial bigotry btw. Does looking for distinguishing features increase susceptibility to bigotry?
Try introspection - it works better than rhetorical questions addressed to the exasperated.

Otherwise, an interesting example of racial bigotry might be the Iroquois underestimation of the threat posed by the appearance of a different tribe of Whites on the Atlantic coast.

Having long despised the short, sickly, rotten-toothed, incompetent, and truth be told bad-smelling and ugly variety of inexplicably rich and only occasionally dangerous people who had camped on the beach for over a century without ever managing to independently feed and house and equip themselves,

and having made no effort to investigate, let alone adopt, the cultural features of the dirt-encrusted, sexually crabbed and perverse, miserably toiling citizenry of those shithole beach "towns"

the Iroquois simply overlooked the possibility of a genuine threat, a competent and competitive tribe of those people showing up inside Iroquois territory.

So was that western tunnel vision, on the part of the Iroquois? They were certainly "western" people.
 
Try introspection - it works better than rhetorical questions addressed to the exasperated.

Otherwise, an interesting example of racial bigotry might be the Iroquois underestimation of the threat posed by the appearance of a different tribe of Whites on the Atlantic coast.

Having long despised the short, sickly, rotten-toothed, incompetent, and truth be told bad-smelling and ugly variety of inexplicably rich and only occasionally dangerous people who had camped on the beach for over a century without ever managing to independently feed and house and equip themselves,

and having made no effort to investigate, let alone adopt, the cultural features of the dirt-encrusted, sexually crabbed and perverse, miserably toiling citizenry of those shithole beach "towns"

the Iroquois simply overlooked the possibility of a genuine threat, a competent and competitive tribe of those people showing up inside Iroquois territory.

So was that western tunnel vision, on the part of the Iroquois? They were certainly "western" people.

So the Iroquois lost because they did not expect the white men to be different from what they already knew and had seen and were content to leave alone?
 
So the Iroquois lost because they did not expect the white men to be different from what they already knew and had seen and were content to leave alone?

The Iroquois lost because they brought a knife to a gun fight. And yes they did not see the big picture however they are descended from the Asian influence as they migrated over the land bridge from Asia to north America.
 
Back
Top