im very curious why nisbett gives such a long example of china and support its idea, than instantly kills it with few lines saying about greeks. it would be a lot better if he gives both the same amount of explanation and then give his idea of which is superior
because i didnt really understand the part saying
a focus on the one-way, individual-class organization of knowledge encourages induction from the single case; a part-whole representation does not.
i want more explantion for this "part-whole representation does not"
asian see things in relations with other things and westerns see through static objects that can be grouped into categories.
language or words differ because of these kind of ideas like it mentioned in the previous chapter.
chapter by chapter for me it seems like this book is becoming more equal towards asians and westerners myb just because he mentions about many different countries.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment