<html>
<body>
At 02:32 PM 10/16/04 +0100, you wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>Natasha Vita-More wrote:<br><br>
"Society is one thing, culture is another. Society may want
to<br>
view women as dumb so that it can foster the vicious cycle of male<br>
dominance, but culture does not see it that way. Culture works as
a<br>
catalyst to make social changes"<br><br>
I'm confused by this.<br><br>
I understood 'culture' to be a *product* of 'society', and i don't see
how they can be at odds in the way described.</blockquote><br>
They are not at "odds." An apple is an apple and a pear
is pear. This does make them at odds with one another.
Society is the relationship between people and common interests of
people, and that can be as broad as sharing chromosomes or individualized
as preference in cuisine.<br><br>
Culture the development of intellectual and creative activity and the
products of such activity. It is also the patterns of behavior
endemic to certain communities and reflects the ideas and ideals of that
community.<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>I do agree that there is no typical
product of 'culture' as a whole, mainly because there is such a huge
variety in our (i mean western) society. In fact, i think it's all but
meaningless. There is no coherent culture, only sub-cultures.
</blockquote><br>
There are cultures, such as the scientific world and the arts
world. There are also subcultures which are groups that grow
out of these cultures and form their own hubs of beliefs, style and
products.<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>Society produces many different
cultural groups, some of them with wildly different bases and behaviours.
What, culturally, do a woman who lives in, say, Salt Lake City and one
who lives in New York City have in common (assuming they are both
stereotypical inhabitants of those places)?</blockquote><br>
The Internet. And a whole lot more. Remember we do live in
the 21st century and the person in Salt Lake City might have business in
New York. The two women could also wear Tom Ford designs, or
practice yoga. Or they might even be transhumanists.<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>The culture of one may well include
catalysts for social change, but i very much doubt if the other
would.</blockquote><br>
Culture is indeed a driver of social change. The art culture is a
very important driver of social change. You can takes these apart
and say that it is the economics of art that is the real driver of social
change or the applied technology used in the art. The world is a
very large system full of all sorts of connections and interrelationships
that are very connected so you can look at it from many
perspectives.<br><br>
<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>Btw, I've never been to either
place, so my examples may be bad ones (if so, blame TV!), but i'm sure
you know what i'm getting at.</blockquote><br>
Not really, but I enjoyed your response.<br><br>
Best,<br>
Natasha<br><br><x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
<dl>
<dd><font face="Viner Hand ITC" size=4 color="#000080">Natasha
Vita-More</font><font face="Times New Roman, Times" color="#0000FF">
<dd><a href="http://www.natasha.cc/" eudora="autourl">http://www.natasha.cc</a><hr>
</font>
<dd><font face="Times New Roman, Times">President, Extropy
Institute
<a href="http://www.extropy.org/" eudora="autourl">http://www.extropy.org</a>
<dd>Founder, Transhumanist Arts & Culture
<a href="http://www.transhumanist.biz/" eudora="autourl">http://www.transhumanist.biz</a></font>
<dd><font face="Times New Roman, Times"><a href="http://www.transhuman.org/" eudora="autourl">http://www.transhuman.org</a>
</font>
</dl></body>
</html>