Okayactivistreporter(OKAR): What's up okayactivists! Because of recent battle on Afrikan culture the last week, today we are talking to Solarus about his opinions on the whole matter. What's da deal yo?

Solarus: PEace

OKAR: MAD MAD Drama! You aiight! You've seemed sort of aggitated the past couple of days! OKP gettin to ya?

Solarus: Sometimes. But it has mostly been the whole schoolwork thing. Grad school's a mutha. Anyways what do you want to ask me?

OKAR: OK, First of all what IS Afrikan culture?

Solarus: In terms of ???

OKAR: Well how does it look, feel, smell, taste? Ya know something tangible?

(Solarus thinks for a minute)

Solarus: Hmmm...**grabs his trusty gallon of water and pours some in a cup** Here drink this.

(OKAR drinks water)

Solarus: So how does it look, feel, smell and taste?

OKAR: Ummm... Like water? **looking puzzled** I don't get it.

**Solarus takes the cup and drinks it**

Solarus: Well to me it tastes like the origins of all life. It looks like a carrier of life that you transferred to it and that will nourish each of the cells in my body. It feels like a personal bond that has been established between us as we have shared something together that will sustain and alleviate our bodies...

OKAR: WHat? That doesn't make any sense. See that is what alot of folks are talking about that esoteric ish. No disrespect but you aren't answering the question.

Solarus: That's just it. I ANSWERED the question. If you want to "look" at Afrikan culture, go to a museum. If you want to "feel" Afrikan culture, go on a date with a South Afrikan. If you want to "smell" and "taste" Afrikan culture go to a Ghanaian restaurant. These "tangibles" that you speak of are meaningless by themselves. It is the PURPOSE of a thing, that is of importance.

OKAR: Well, I mean stuff like: what is the legislative system like in an afrikan society?
who runs it?

Solarus: In modern society, either like a European fashioned government or Islamic government, depending on the country. Europeans and non-Afrikans usually run it or at least have the REAL power behind the Afrikan puppet governments.

OKAR: Come on man, you know what I mean. Back in the day. OR the Afrikan culture that YOU are talking about. Why are you running around the questions like that? If you don't know just say that but don't waste everyone's time. I mean I got plenty of questions but if this Afrikan culture is just some imaginary place that you made up then say that. for real.

Solarus: If you got more questions then asked and please be specific.

OKAR: Ok well what is the spiritual side of an afrikan like?
who/what is the divine being an afrikan give thanks to?
does this spirituality show itself in day-to-day practices?

Solarus: See "God is IMMANENT" http://www.okayplayer.com/cgi-bin/dcforum/dcboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=3291&forum=DCForumID1&archive=yes
and then come talk to me

OKAR: Come on man, you know you sound like an ass. You paint this big monolithic picture of Afrikan culture with a "K" but when questioned about it, you can't answer. Afrika is so diverse but you create something you call Afrika with a "K" and you can't answer any questions about it.

SOlarus: Correction: YOU created this monolithic Afrika with a "K" and expect me to make gross generalizations about how each Afrikan lives, breathes and acts. i asked you to be specific but you didn't. I admit, that I may helped create this "mythical Afrika with a "K" by erroneously and irresponsibly using terms inappropriately and I apologize for that. When I first started posting on these boards I avoided using the phrase "Afrikan culture" because I was aware of how misleading that phrase can be. Normally I used the terms "Afrikan conceptual system" or "worldview" as those were more specific. However as time past, I became lazy and used that phrase for brevity and also because I did not want to explain myself anymore. I had planned to do an in-depth post on "culture" but I just kept pushing it back. However things happen when they should happen, therefore it's happening now>>>SEE "What is Culture?"

OKAR: So what do you mean you used the term erroneously?

Solarus: Well culture consists of many variables but the underlying assumptions of a culture form the conceptual system>>> SEE "Realms of Culture"

So basically if I say "culture" I am making a reference to the fundamental realm of culture. The core thoughts are the key as they inform the actions of a people.
That was the point of the water analogy.

OKAR: So now your are denying the existence of Afrikan culture?

Solarus: Which one?

OKAR: Come on dude, be real. You constantly label things as Afrikan or non-Afrikan but now you are saying that there is no such thing as Afrikan culture. Which is it?

Solarus: First let me say that I rarely make those distinctions of what is "non-Afrikan" or "Afrikan." And when I do, it is usually in reference to three concepts, which include CHRISTIANITY, JUDAISM, and ISLAM. I make specific references to those three religions because when surveying the origins and fundamental ideals propagated by those religions, do not correspond to the fundamental culture, i.e. conceptual system, found within traditional Afrikan societies.

Furthermore I don't speak in absolute terms, so basically to say "Afrikan" or "non-Afrikan" should be understood in terms of "tendency." Let me reiterate again, CULTURE IS NOT STATIC. Culture is DYNAMIC. In the social sciences, predictions are based on significant tendencies rather that absolute behavior. It's interesting to note that within the evolution of psychology in the Western world, experimental methods were and still are for the most part, based on methods used in 19th century European chemistry/physics. This road was taken to make psychology a "science" vs. being "philosophy." Despite early Western psychologists hopes and dreams, psychology is far from being an "objective" and "absolute" science. The truth of the matter is that it is that people are dynamic and in constant flux therefore the "science" is too.

OKAR: Ok that makes sense but how can you justify a distinction of what's "afrikan" or not, if you say people and culture is dynamic.

Solarus: Well how do people and culture change? They are introduced to new ideas, experiences and situations through factors such as enviromental/climatic change, discovery/creation of new artifacts that can potentially change social order, introduction to foreign cultures, etc. Now with introduction to new knowledge about the world, the worldview may not necessarily make radical shifts but evolve by encompassing new concepts. Every group has its own unique scope of the world, which can change or evolve with time but radical deviations from core concepts are usually far and few between when analyzing cultures through history. The only time there are radical shifts are when group's ADOPT foreign cultural cores. This often occurs as a byproduct of adopting the aspects of another group's structural culture such as economical/politcal structures or religion. And then the other reason is through forced acculturation which is often caused by colonialism and forced servitude/enslavement.

Despite these changes one can see dominant themes within traditional cultural cores. When I say something is "non-Afrikan," this is in reference to motives and reasonings for a given behavior that is not endemic of traditional Afrikan dominant themes. You see, one's perspective on the world guides one's behavior. Therefore, one can see certain tendencies in behavior BASED on their cultural cores.

For instance, in the "God is IMMANENT" post, I argue traditional Afrikan conceptions of the divine are based on the immanency of the divine, meaning that the divine is within all things. This concept promotes inclusiveness in the structuring of spiritual themes. Despite whether the traditional Afrikan group possesses a highly-structured spiritual system or not, the promotion of inclusiveness of thought is usually evident. Thus I argue that the Big 3 are NOT endemic of a traditional Afrikan cultural core based on the fact that all three are very exclusive in nature, i.e. if you don't follow this system you are wrong. Are you following?

OKAR: Yes I think so.

Solarus: Well let me try to make this even more clear. When you look at a various martial arts, they each have specific methods in overcoming one's opponent. When you train, you learn specific methods. The idea is to make the art instinctual so you will respond in particular and guided ways when fighting. Now when you are in a actual fight there is no structure and no rules. You are left with your own knowledge and techniques to fend for yourself. You have learned the art but can you apply it? Depending on the art you learned you will have certain tendencies that will guide your movement and strategy but the point is that the particular situation you find yourself in is unpredictable. One has to be able to adapt (be dynamic) to the given situation in order to win. However, no matter what you your strategy, your tactics will largely be defined by the tenets of you martial knowledge as that is "all you know." If a person is primarily a follower of aikido then you won't see them doing flying kicks as this is not part of their core knowledge. Now one can study a number of styles but these styles will be evident in there fighting. Bruce Lee was against structuralized martial systems, saying that one should follow his own path. Although bruce created his "own" path, one could see that it was largely his own syncretism of wing chun, boxing, and Western fencing. I personally believed he realized this when he tried to teach "The way that is no way" to his students. He saw that he indeed created a system with its own assumptions like the ones that he was against, which is why he later closed all of his own schools.

OKAR: OK I think I got you now.

____________________________
"the real pyramids were built with such precision that you can't slide a piece of paper between two 4,000 lb stones, and have shafts perfectly aligned so that you can see a tiny aperture through dozens of these mammoth blocks

Akwaaba

“Culture” is one of those elusive concepts in the social sciences that are always present but rarely considered and defined because of their complexity (Cole, 1992). Culture’s existence has been a thorn in the side of all major Western mainstream psychological frameworks because of their affinity to relying on universal approaches to understanding human behavior and cognition (Cole, 1992; Garcia Coll & Magnuson, 1999). However in the most recent years culture has been receiving more and more attention.

Culture has been given many definitions and many understandings. From one of the earliest conceptions of culture in recent Western scholarship (Tylor, 1874), it was defined as “that complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, custom and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as member of society.” Although this definition is pretty inclusive, its use of “that complex whole” is vague in that no clear understanding of the function and orientation of culture can be surmised. Nobles (1985) defines culture as “a process which gives people a general design for living and pasterns for interpreting their reality.” This definition serves better to express the function of culture. “Process” further distinguishes this “complex whole” as being active and dynamic versus being a passive and static phenomenon. Traditionally Western theorists have viewed culture through the latter description. Cole (1999) asserts that this description has been expressed by the notion that culture is an independent variable meaning that culture is separate from other aspects of human behavior and cognition.

Cole (1999) suggests that an alternate view of culture be taken, one where culture is viewed as a medium through which all things function. This perspective compares to Nobles’ definition. This design acts as an active medium through which the human constructs her/his world. However the human also re-constructs this medium, which causes the dynamism of culture through its ability to be changed by new situations, experiences, environments, etc. Through these qualities culture has a serious impact on human development. Using Cole’s metaphor, the process of development is like the growth of a plant in which culture is the total environment (complex whole) of the plant, including the soil type, the climate, the water supply, intervention of humans and animals, pollution etc. (Cole, 1999). Therefore the impact is not just “serious,” but rather it is central.

Cole, M. (1999). Culture in Development. M. H. Bornstein and M.
E. Lamb (Eds.), Developmental psychology: An advanced textbook (4th ed.), pp 73-121. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Garcia Coll, C. & Magnuson, K. (1999). Cultural influences on child development: Are we ready for a paradigm shift? In C. Nelson & A. Masten (Eds.), Cultural processes in child development. Minnesota symposium on child psychology, vol. 29 (pp.1-24). New Jersy, Erlbaum.

Nobles, W. (1985). Africanity and the Black Family. Oakland: Black Family Institute Publications.

SE wo werE fi na wosankofa a yenkyi.


PEace
solarICE

Still representin' the RED, BLACK & GREEN since 1978!
EFF RED, WHITE, & BLUE*!

Ain't a damn thing changed...

*That includes the Panamanian "dummy government setup by you know who" flag.


***Something to think about***

"if the god of these religions (judaism/christianity/islam) is not above using terrorist tactics to make people believe in Him (and what's the big deal if people do Not believe in Him? God is a egomaniac) then why wouldnt the hardcore followers of these faiths have a tendency to terrorism as well?"- yuckwheat

And one more thing:
I AM NOT UTAMAROHO AND HIS VIEWS DON'T NECESSARILY REFLECT MINE!!!

____________________________
"the real pyramids were built with such precision that you can't slide a piece of paper between two 4,000 lb stones, and have shafts perfectly aligned so that you can see a tiny aperture through dozens of these mammoth blocks

Akwaaba

Wade Boykin (1997) dissects culture into several realms that offers us a more in-depth understanding of it. In his multidimensional rendering of culture theory, culture is divided into four different realms: fundamental, functional, expressive, and structural. The most essential is the fundamental realm. The fundamental realm serves as the parent and body of knowledge to the other realms. The essential worldview and beliefs begin within this realm. The underlying conceptual system or ways of giving meaning to the people of a particular culture are the basis for how the world is defined, interpreted and conceived. Ultimately this basis begins to form the developing core values, priorities, and preferences of the given culture, and then these values begin to cause behavioral inclination and propensities of the culture.

These actions all occur within Boykin’s (1997) delineation of the fundamental realm. Once this level is established the other three realms evolve from this foundation, but each of these realms also influence one another. A given people’s technology and technological understandings lie within the functional realm of culture. All of particular tools, concrete skills and methodology lie in this realm and are informed by the fundamental. The fundamental realm guides the purpose for creation and usage of all of the materials used by a group. When a particular tool is used by people of different cultures, if the fundamental realms do not possess the same or similar propensities, then the same tool may have totally different uses. The dynamism of culture still holds true in this analysis, therefore if the fundamental realm should change due to cross-cultural exchange then the tool may possess the same use. However, if there is no exchange and dissimilar propensities then the uses probably will differ completely.

A humorous but telling example of this idea can be found in the movie “The Gods must be Crazy!” In this movie, A Western pilot throws a Coke bottle out of a plane while flying over the Kalahari Desert in Africa. A !Kung tribesman (Bushman) finds the Coke bottle a takes it to his village where the villagers use the bottle for everything but drinking coke or any form of liquid. The tool becomes a food grinder, game piece for children and even an object of desire and violence. The fundamental realm of their culture did not inform the functional realm to use the item as an object for drinking thus the key difference was in the meaning of the object (its purpose) and not the object itself.

The expressive realm contains the symbols, basic customs and recreational outlets for the culture. This realm manifests the artistic motifs of a culture that stem from the core values and beliefs held in the fundamental realm. For instance, the practice of yoga within Hindu culture stems from the underlying assumption that all things in the universe are essentially the same thing or “one.” The physical exercise of yoga helps the person to join the mind, body and spirit, which thereby, allow the “self” to be liberated from the illusion that he/she is differentiated from all things in the universe. Thus the practice of yoga is simply an expression of the concept of “oneness” within the fundamental realm of the culture.

Finally the structural realm is the source for societal rules or laws, institutions and media. This is the realm that literally provides a cohesive structure in which the people of the culture can operate. Military, governments, schools, religions, etc. are all codified within this realm. Of all the realms the structural realm serves as the mechanism that sustains and perpetuates the culture within the society. Then, as was stated before, the functional, expressive and structural all interact and influence one another while feeding from the perspectives within the fundamental realm. These four realms combined, eventually surmise the multidimensional cultural context (Boykin, 1997).

SE wo werE fi na wosankofa a yenkyi.


PEace
solarICE

Still representin' the RED, BLACK & GREEN since 1978!
EFF RED, WHITE, & BLUE*!

Ain't a damn thing changed...

*That includes the Panamanian "dummy government setup by you know who" flag.


***Something to think about***

"if the god of these religions (judaism/christianity/islam) is not above using terrorist tactics to make people believe in Him (and what's the big deal if people do Not believe in Him? God is a egomaniac) then why wouldnt the hardcore followers of these faiths have a tendency to terrorism as well?"- yuckwheat

And one more thing:
I AM NOT UTAMAROHO AND HIS VIEWS DON'T NECESSARILY REFLECT MINE!!!

____________________________
"the real pyramids were built with such precision that you can't slide a piece of paper between two 4,000 lb stones, and have shafts perfectly aligned so that you can see a tiny aperture through dozens of these mammoth blocks

^(The above post should read "Realms of Culture".)

PEACE!

____________________________
"the real pyramids were built with such precision that you can't slide a piece of paper between two 4,000 lb stones, and have shafts perfectly aligned so that you can see a tiny aperture through dozens of these mammoth blocks

OKAR: That is starting to make sense. But honestly, how much of this fundamental culture do Afrikan Americans possess? It is evident that we have very little attachment to our roots and what tribes we come. So how do you figure that we possess any of this?

Solarus: Good questions. to answer the first question, it boils down to survival and the processes of acculturation. Like we discussed before, when one is put in any situation, they will respond with their vices which stems from their own cultural core. This is the situation Afrikans in bondage experienced when first being brought to the Americas. Afrikans had to be acculturated first to European customs, practices, values and then to the European cultural core. In any situation, the least difficult task to accomplish is to enculturate a child (grow up within) than to acculturate an adult (teach new culture to an outsider). Thus the later generations of Afrikans who were born in captivity and the degree of their enculturation are the most important factor in determining this question of Afrikan cultural "amnesia."

Their are several factors that must be considered, a few of which are:

1. Some European groups have been more effective in acculturating and enculturating persons of other cultures than other European groups.

2. The extent of availability of enculturating processes to generations of bondspersons varied at certain times in certain areas.

3. The desire to enculturate generations of bondsperson varied at times and amongst people within a given culture.

4. The complexity and resistance-strength of specific Afrikan structural culture varied among tribes/ethnic groups.

To give an explain of the first factor, Europeans possessed different methods of enculturating bondspersons. The seasoning processes served to instill in Afrikans their status within the current social order but did little to enculturate them to the cultural core of Europeans. For enculturation to take effect, aspects of the structural realms of culture must take place (e.g. education/schooling, religion, media etc.). As we know already, schooling enslaved Afrikans or their descendants was forbidden, abhorred and suppressed in many cases throughout the Americas. Also the prevalence of the modern media and communication has only been enculturation-efficient for about 50 years. Before 50 years ago, the ability to be isolated from propaganda (i.e. television, radio, internet) and other cultures altogether was not as difficult as it is today.

The French and Spanish largely used methods to make Afrikans "be like them." They taught Afrikans European religions (in this case, Catholicism) and European customs to make them more "civilized." Also miscegenation was a huge factor among them. They believed in giving them "good genes." The British possessed (or at least tried to)tighter reigns on their colonies, even in situations where they weren't the majority. I think they learn a lesson or two from the American Revolution. The British also are more structured and rigid in their methods of education. Often the male student within a British educational system will be taught in school AWAY from his parents thus student is more exposed and indoctrinated into the aims of the system. The British method is probably the most effective independent of any other variable but was not fully actualized until Afrikans were accepted into British schools.

Americans had varied methods as they were a varied group of Europeans (mostly British) who had to adapt to a new environment, new identity (no longer "European" but "American") and a permanent and natural "class system" (blacks are naturally inferior). Overerall Americans seemed to have been more effective but this is probably due to the second factor I mentioned. There were more Europeans in the Americas thus greater access to enculturating practices for Afrikans. Also Afrikans were in close proximity with Europeans for the exchange. We can still see more Afrikan cultural retentions when looking at Afrikans in the South which is probably due to the access/proximity factor. Looking at the Afrikans of the Sea Islands of the East coast of America, we can see the prevalence of Afrikan cultural retentions amongst the Gullah/Gichi peoples. We also can see how today this culture is being lost due to the proximity issue. A number of these islands inhabited by Afrikans are now owned and run by corporations who have bought the land and established resorts/getaways on the land.

Another factor was the desire to enculturate Afrikans. At first, most Europeans did not care or want to enculturate Afrikans but this changed over time. Primarily religious factions, deemed it necessary to enculturate Afrikans through religious conversion (e.g. Catholics, Quakers, etc.) Then the occassional European apologist felt it necessary to educate an Afrikan person or persons. Although the abolitionist movement possessed motives to free Afrikans from the horrors of slavery, significant theme behind the movement was "Afrikans are humans, too and can be civilized like Europeans as long as they are taught." This is not a condemnation of the movement, only an analysis of the inherent supremacy within it. Although John Brown wanted to free Afrikans from bondage which was a noble and courageous idea (feat) within itself, he still maintained a paternalistic view of Afrikans, which clearly displayed his sense of European supremacy.

The last factor i mentioned exposes how significant the structural realms of a culture can be in perpetuating the culture. Some Afrikan groups possessed more rigid and stringent religious/social/economic systems that others. Some Afrikan tribes live in more decentralized groups than compared to others. For instance the Nago (Yoruba) peoples were more centralized in governance than some of their immediate Afrikan neighbors during the time of the slave trade. Particularly in reference to religious/spiritual practices. When looking in the Caribbean, the traditional practices of the Yoruba are more pronounced then a number of other Afrikan ethnic groups. This does not demean or lessen the importance of other ethnic groups. This only shows a common occurence among all human experience, "big fish are harder to fry."

____________________________
"the real pyramids were built with such precision that you can't slide a piece of paper between two 4,000 lb stones, and have shafts perfectly aligned so that you can see a tiny aperture through dozens of these mammoth blocks

OKAR: That's peace. But as you implied," This Afrikan cultural core is more prevalent in some than in others." If this is the case why is it important that those who "don't have it" try and get it?

Solarus: I believe that it is a survival issue. I think that reinstating a traditional Afrikan core is important for Afrikans worldwide because it is an issue of POWER. Power is the ability to define one's reality. If you define your reality based on someone else's worldview, what does that do for you? Absolutely nothing. As a result of defining ourselves and our lives by foreign standards and views, the continent of Afrika is a state of disarray. Constant civil wars, foreign corporations and factions control and own valuable resources on the constant, constant famine, polluting of the natural environment, dysfunctional communities, etc. If you look at Afrikans in America, you see disproportional number of Afrikans as opposed to Europeans, in the prison/juvenile system, black self-hatred, dysfunctional families, high rates of drug addiction, high rate of health issues, educational underachievement etc. The fact of the matter is we've tried THEIR way, so what about ours? I can't honestly say that I know for a fact that a return to an Afrikan conceptual system will ultimately allow us to solve our problems but I KNOW IT CAN for some problems. I focus on child development and through my research and experience, I KNOW that improving the overall well-being of AFrikan children is incumbent on emphasizing Afrocultural values. Once you understand that any schooling system is an enculturating process and you understand the history of the American schooling system, then you will know why an Afrikan-centered schooling system will have multiple positive outcomes for Afrikan children.

OKAR: What do you mean?

Solarus: Well I made mention to the institution of education being a part of the structural realm of a culture which serves as a perpetuatory mechanism for the fundamental realm and culture altogether. As far as the history of the AMerican educational institution, one can go back to a quote made my one of America's founding fathers, Thomas Jefferson. He said that the purpose of grammar school should be to identify the "few geniuses who will be raked from the rubbish." (See _The American School: 1642-1993_, J. Spring). From this quote we can see that the American schooling system from its inception was NEVER to improve the overall development of children (especially afrikan children as they weren't even included among those "to be raked" in Jefferson's mind) but rather as a sorting process to establish a "natural aristocracy."

Schools also have been heavily influenced by the prevailing theories within discipline of psychology throughout the years. Behaviorist theories were particularly of importance. Simply put, the behaviorist views the human as a passive being that learns from imposed outside information and is driven by external motivation primarily as punishment or rewards. Knowledge is gained through drill, repetition and memorization. This form of knowledge acquistion is separate and disconnected from real life.
These factors are obviously predicated by factors within the European cultural core such as materialism and rhetorical ethic. Materialism manifests through the behaviorists refusal to consider any cognitive, emotional, spiritual factors significant to the person's development. The abstractedness of knowledge from real life experience only promotes the rhetorical ethic, or the disconnection between word and actual practice. When knowledge is perceived as something to read and contemplate rather than experience, then the buffer between thought and action is lost, devalued and/or deemphasized.

Furthermore the model of the educational system exspouses a corporate-industrial model needed for a capitalist society. The negative effects of this model (besides promoting capitalism of course ) is that the individual creativity of children, value of communal importance, value of AFFECT (emotion) is negated and lost. Children are taught to be unemotional robots that do as they are ordered. Any student failing to meet these requirements is seen a "threat to the system" and is disciplined. In fact the prison-making industry often bases it projection of the need for more prisons on the reading levels of 3rd graders. The thinking is that, at this point, if a child's reading levels are below the national standard, then they are more likely to not to matriculate in the school system, drop-out which thereby leads to deviant behavior.

Not only is this detrimental to Afrikan (as well as other children, IMO Europeans included) but this sort of system is inherently ANTI-Afrikan in that it negates traditional African values such as communalism, diversity (pluralism), or the importance of affective behavior, among others. Many studies have been conducted to support the claim that curriculum based on African-centered values and emphasizing African-centered methods of teaching, are more effective in developing Afrikan children with higher academic success, higer levels of self-efficacy, less inclination to drugs and delinquent behavior and overall better outcomes than Afrikan children in the same socioeconomic range in the standard American schooling system.

And remember "AFrikan-centered" doesn't simply mean teaching "Black history." I have experienced plenty of so-called "Afrikan-centered" schools that were not Afrikan-centered at all. All they did was mask American methods of teaching with infusing Afrikan history much like multiculturalists do. Henry Louis Gates Jr is a good example of this. He advocates multiculturalism but all this means is including non-European history in the curriculum. "What is taught" is one thing but "how it is taught" is the essential variable. The "How" is the most significant when infusing one's cultural core as the "how" enforces the "way things are done" i.e. one's cultural orientation/worldview.

Anyways like I said before, I can't speak across the board but in terms of education and developing physically, mentally, emotionally, socially healthly Afrikans, adopting methods of education influenced by our traditional Afrikan cultural conceptual system is imperative.

____________________________
"the real pyramids were built with such precision that you can't slide a piece of paper between two 4,000 lb stones, and have shafts perfectly aligned so that you can see a tiny aperture through dozens of these mammoth blocks

"When knowledge is perceived as something to read and contemplate rather than experience, then the buffer between thought and action is lost, devalued and/or deemphasized."

As Mfundishi Vita says, "tai-chi chuan can be read all day long, but few know how to DO IT!...books and treatise on peace can be read/studyied/memorized, but few know how to DO IT! learning the virtues associated with how to treat one's fellow human being can be taught all day, but few know how to DO IT!"

Matter of fact, in todays time, the "study" of certain disciplines/value systems is seen AS THE DOING! the mere action of study (reading) is seen as the "applied will" and is substituted in place of actualization. Marimba Ani makes a point of this when speaking of the incesant "talking" of western philosophers.
___________________________________
FUNTUMMIREKU-DENKYEMMIREKU
A Mythical Two-Headed Crocodile Sharing a Common Stomach. A symbol of UNITY IN DIVERSITY & WARNING AGAINST INTERNAL SQUABBLES WHERE THERE IS A COMMON DESTINY. Here's a pic: http://www.library.cornell.edu/africana/Writing_Systems/Funtummireku.html

If it works do it, if it doesn't, DO BETTER!

click here to see a pic of me: http://www.dogma-movie.com/pics/church/images/buddychrist1.jpg

(((((PEACE)))))

"...the incessant 'talking' of western philosophers..."

Indeed!


---------------------------
"There's a Red Krayola somewhere in Alicia Keys just screaming to get out." -me

Native, Version 2
http://www.nativemagazine.com

Burning Man
http://www.burningman.com

________________________________________
...white feather wings.

http://thelastdaysofrussell.bandcamp.com (soon - "Election Day on Monster Island")

OKAR: Yo I think you've made your point but there are a few questions that still need to be answered.
S
olarus: Okay, what are they?

OKAR: Well what exactly is "natural?"

Solarus: IMO "natural" is anything that happens. moving on...

OKAR: If that is the case why is eating meat not "natural" or driving a car.

Solarus: I don't recall saying that. Yes eating meat is natural and so is driving a car.

OKAR: So why don't you eat meat and why have you criticized Americans for the pollution caused by the use of energy? BTW do you drive a car.

Solarus: Repeat after me:
IF IT WORKS, DO IT, IF IT DOESN'T DO BETTER.
Also this statement means is that if a certain action has negative consequences on you or your environment (which will ultimately have a negative effect on you). Eating meat has a negative effect on my body and knowing this, there is no reason for me to eat it. Americans are so wasteful in everything they do. I cringe when I see people in restaurants throwing away food, EVEN IF ITS MEAT! Hell somebody could eat that shit!.My mother told me about these people here... ***shaking head***

But anyways, this transfers to all areas of American life: WASTE WASTE WASTE! THe amount of pollution that stems from this is ridiculous. And what makes it worse is the American tendency to not prevent the situation but just "cure its ill effects" which only proves to be a quick fix and not a permanent solution. "THe ozone is depleting... BUY MORE SUN TAN (or MELANIN which currently can be bought in the stores." I realize that the main perpetrators of these atrocities are the ones who have the most to gain, i.e. oil and energy companies. There are alternative methods of energy that can be used that would ultimately be less harmful to the environment but the more reusable a source the less money that can be gained. Thus the masses must to an extent rely on the whim of the one's with financial power.

And yes I have a car, my mother won it in 1995 and gave it to me! God Bless America!

OKAR: Isn't this hypocritical? So how do you feel knowing that you do what you condemn?

Solarus: I need to find a source of transportation less harmful than a car. A bus is ten times worse and walking is something that now I do often living in DC. This is usually not an option in the South because cities are so spread out and public transportation sucks. I lived in Dallas and there was no rail system until 1996. I'm not an engineer so I won't be designing any vehicles anytime soon. In short I need to DO BETTER...

OKAR: Ok so what about marijuana?

Solarus: What about it?

OKAR: Is it "natural" or dare I ask "Afrikan?"

Solarus: Sure it's natural. Afrikan? Well I don't know if the plant originates in Afrika. I don't know where it comes from.

OKAR: I mean do you think smoking it is "Afrikan?"

Solarus: It could be I guess. Is drinking alcohol Afrikan? Sure. People drink alcohol all throughout Afrika and have been independent of foreign intervention. But I don't think Afrikans have a monopoly on using intoxicating substances in the body. I think Earthlings in general do that. I heard that even chimpanzees purposely wait for fruit to ferment and then eat it.

Now I don't think that smoking marijuana is good for the body. Smoking ANYTHING isn't good for the body. BUt oh well. As Brother Ray use to say, "Do as you do."

OKAR: Ok well it seems you and other OkayAfrikans often attack Western culture and are out to destroy it. Why is that? I mean isn't that Western to say Western culture as the source of all evil?

Solarus: First off let me say that I never said, nor do I believe that Western culture is the source of all evil. I do believe that as of NOW (the modern world), the problems of the world are largely due in some fashion or form to perpetuation of Western culture and non-Western peoples' susceptibility to adhering to it despite their own cultural cores. However source of ALL evil? Naw that just stupid. They ain't that damn tight.

Then any seeming "attack" on Western culture is in reality a DEFENSE from it. I don't think people on these Internet message boards realize the extent that Western culture,in whichever form it takes, American, French, German, etc. is spread around the world. And by some strange coincidence, the adopting of Western ways for most people means the negation and demonization of their own traditions and selves INCLUDING the loss of political and economic control of their nations and land to Western factions. Women in Kenya don't kill themselves by bleaching their skin because its "just a fad." No that's self-hatred. And that's not even considering the lives of Afrikans in America.

I'm not trying to say Europeans should not be proud of their traditions or cultural core whatsoever. And I'm definitely not trying to change THEM, although they want to change the more the merrier . However let it be known that my goal is to help as many Afrikans as I can find some power within through their own traditional thought processes. It's about RETRIEVING OUR ANCESTRAL BIRTHRIGHT.

Besides I ain't tryin to make converts to anything. "Become Afrikan and Olodumare will bless you and give you a kingdom with fifty wives..." WTF!
I'm trying to have a discussion as this is what these boards are for. Mostly I type to focus my own thoughts as this interview itself is doing. I have work to do and I go to the children as most of these older negroes is a waste of my time anyway. But I still can get valuable information from them. Everyone else included.

OKAR: Alright well I think that is it. Hopefully this explains some of your views to the okp fam. I know it did for me.

Solarus: I hope so too because assumptions can be a mutha!

OKAR: I feel you. But hey when can we hook up with yo boy Jojo again? We fienin' for some recipes around here. Holidays is coming up and some folks ain't tryna gain grandma's cookin 15 this year! I know I ain't!

Solarus: I don't know that cat be busy but when I talk to him again I'll make sure to tell him.

OKAR: Aiight that's cool, well I guess that's it with this interview. Thanks again Solarus for takin the time to explain yo crazy ass manifesto!

<OKAR and Solarus laugh>

Solarus: No prob... PEACE

OKAR: PEACE

***

____________________________
"the real pyramids were built with such precision that you can't slide a piece of paper between two 4,000 lb stones, and have shafts perfectly aligned so that you can see a tiny aperture through dozens of these mammoth blocks

>>Solarus: IMO "natural" is anything that happens. moving on...

nat·u·ral (nchr-l, nchrl)
adj.
1)Present in or produced by nature: a natural pearl.
2)Of, relating to, or concerning nature: a natural environment.
3)Conforming to the usual or ordinary course of nature: a natural death.

Then what is the reason behind wanting to eat organic produce? let me rephrase that..."what is the reason behind YOU wanting to eat organic produce?" ultimately (on the ABSOLUTE level) everything that happens is natural. however, as when looking at the specifics of some cultural core beliefs (as you do about with several afrikan groups) the APPLICATION of an absolute ideaology is what's important. i think this is what the interviewer was asking. your answer doesn't seem too applicable FOR YOU. how do you "use" this definition, "natural is anything that happens" in your life?

everybody sees the same sun in the sky, but many people have different beliefs on what it is.

your answer avoids the subjective (as it applies to you) and rests in an ambiguous "absolute realm". look at the definitions above and try to answer the question, even if its nothing more than syncing up with the "natural occurances" one. i.e. "it's natural for a tree to fall when cut." anything different happening is an anomaly to say the least. "what are some anomalies you've experienced?" might be a better question.




___________________________________
FUNTUMMIREKU-DENKYEMMIREKU
A Mythical Two-Headed Crocodile Sharing a Common Stomach. A symbol of UNITY IN DIVERSITY & WARNING AGAINST INTERNAL SQUABBLES WHERE THERE IS A COMMON DESTINY. Here's a pic: http://www.library.cornell.edu/africana/Writing_Systems/Funtummireku.html

If it works do it, if it doesn't, DO BETTER!

click here to see a pic of me: http://www.dogma-movie.com/pics/church/images/buddychrist1.jpg

(((((PEACE)))))

Akwaaba

Avoiding explicative definition? Yes.

I'm avoiding truly giving a definition to "natural" for the same reason Bruce Lee avoided condemned "martial systems." Like you said yourself "natural" has a personal and subjective meaning, thus and tangible definition of it leads to dogmatism. How do you know what is truly "natural" or not? When early Afrikan explorer came to Turtle Island (America) BEFORE COLUMBUS and experienced snow, "white cold" falling from the sky was not "natural." Thus the definition of what is "natural" or not changed. Therefore defining what one will and will not do on what they perceive as "natural," is limited by definition.

This also is a potential great source of unnecessary conflict between persons and groups. For a Muslim "natural" is guided by the Quran, therefore a Muslim and non-Muslim would have a different take on what is "natural." Eating pork is not "natural" as Allah defines nature and forbids pork-eating, so a a pork-eater is committing "unnatural" behavior.

With the previously given example we can easily see the tendency for rigidity. Once one thinks they have a suitable (or ultimate) source of information defining what is natural or not is often unopen for change or even reflection. That's why I prefer to define what is suitable and unsuitable in terms of optimality.

Optimal from "optimum"
optimum-

1 : the amount or degree of something that is most favorable to some end; especially : the most favorable condition for the growth and reproduction of an organism
2 : greatest degree attained or attainable under implied or specified conditions

Discussing in terms of optimality, one understands that there is always room for improvement, change or growth depending on new information found or change in situation/fluidity. It promotes adaptability. This is the reasoning by this saying,

"If it works, do it. If doesn't, DO BETTER!"

SE wo werE fi na wosankofa a yenkyi.


PEace
solarICE

Still representin' the RED, BLACK & GREEN since 1978!
EFF RED, WHITE, & BLUE*!

Ain't a damn thing changed...

*That includes the Panamanian "dummy government setup by you know who" flag.


***Something to think about***

"if the god of these religions (judaism/christianity/islam) is not above using terrorist tactics to make people believe in Him (and what's the big deal if people do Not believe in Him? God is a egomaniac) then why wouldnt the hardcore followers of these faiths have a tendency to terrorism as well?"- yuckwheat

And one more thing:
I AM NOT UTAMAROHO AND HIS VIEWS DON'T NECESSARILY REFLECT MINE!!!

____________________________
"the real pyramids were built with such precision that you can't slide a piece of paper between two 4,000 lb stones, and have shafts perfectly aligned so that you can see a tiny aperture through dozens of these mammoth blocks

Some people seemed "convinced" that there is no such thing as various wordviews (fundamental realms) of various cultures. Well here is a discussion on various psychological articles that note these "differences."
***
Group Importance

Miller and Bersnof (1995) studied the moral judgment and interpersonal morality between American and Hindu Indians. The participants were asked to rate and comment on the behavior and feelings of persons in various hypothetical incidences. The overall findings showed that the Indian participants focused more on social duty than personal decision-making unlike their American counterparts, who tended to place a high value on personal decision-making. Unlike the Kohlbergian model, which emphasizes “justice,” the Indian participants gave a greater priority to interpersonal responsibilities relative to competing social justice expectations. Americans possessed what the researchers termed an “individual-oriented” perspective while the Indians possessed a “duty-based” perspective.
This individual-oriented perspective, or moral system, refers to a system where the self is an independent agent with unique individual motives, whose relation and commitment to others is balanced by self-interests. In contrast, the duty-based moral system refers to a moral system centered on the conceptualization of self as part of a whole, or interdependent social body. This perspective views the group and interpersonal responsibilities as more important than self-interests and personal ambitions. This emphasis on interdependence and “interpersonal responsibilities over self-interests” can also be seen in other non-Western cultures
Tobin, Wu & Davidson (1989) expose the emphasis on group interdependence possessed by the Japanese and the individual independence that is emphasized by Americans. In this comparative study of pre-school socialization, Tobin et. al., videotaped numerous class sessions from persons various cultures, and then acquired commentary on each session from the participants. The participants were all educators within their respective cultures. In response to the misbehavior of a child in class, Americans made speculations reflective of their individual orientation, such as the prominent inference that the child’s misbehavior was due to his intellectual boredom with the lessons. From this idea we see that the boy as valuing his own self and intellectual prowess and not wanting to be involved with the lesson that everyone else is doing.

The Japanese interpretation also viewed the child’s individuality as the source of his unruly behavior. However the difference between the interpretations was the outlook on individuality. The American view saw the boy as possibly “intellectually gifted.” The Japanese rejected this notion because according to Japanese cultural thought, one cannot be intelligent if one is not obedient and “well-behaved” (i.e. compliant to social order). The Japanese saw his behavior as the result of a “dependency disorder,” meaning they viewed his actions as representative of his not knowing how to be properly “dependent” (i.e. needful of others in one’s group) and thereby sensitive to others. Thus he needs to learn how to act within a group, versus separate from a group, for proper development

***
Continental Afrikan Studies

Conservation Tasks

A number of studies have been conducted in Afrika rating analyzing Afrikan behavior based on Western theories of behavior. In general Afrikans tend to score on a substandard level in terms of Western theories of intelligence and cognitive functioning. On average, Afrikan persons who live in industrial (i.e. Westernized) and have been educated (i.e. enculturated) in Western schools, rate on standard levels or above on Western-based scales.

For instance the the theories of the Swiss scholar, Jean Piaget, have often been used in studies concerning the cognitive development of Afrikan children (and adults). Piaget argued that his theories were universal to all humans despite any cultural differences. In fact in his linear, invariant stage approach to development, "culture" only affected a child's development through stimulation. This means that a child's development was stimulated (or not) by one's culture. Therefore, Afrikan children performing on substandard stages of development for their ages was (is) due to the fact that their culture does not stimulate their development but rather impedes it.

Piaget's theory on "conservation" is probably the most popular of his theories studied. Basically the ability of conservation is normally attained by children in the Western world roughly between the ages of 7-11. This is during the concrete operational stage, which is the stage where children first acquire certain logical structures that allow them to perform various mental operations, that can be "reversed." For instance the conservation task is suppose to show reversibility. The task goes as such:

1. Two short and wide identical beakers are placed side by side with the equal amounts of water in front of the child.
2. Child sees and is told that both have equal amounts of water.
3. Water from one beaker is poured to a tall, thin glass.
4. Child is asked if the other beaker and the tall glass have the same amount of water in them.

A child that is a "conserver" would show "reversibility" by knowing that the water amounts are the same despite the varying water level change due to shape differences. A nonconserver would think that the taller glass has more water because of shape difference.

This particular task has been repeatedly conducted throughout the continent of Afrika. Usually children educated in within Western schools performed on equal levels of children in Western countries but for non Western-educated children, their results were usually lower than their counterparts. One of the major factors in the assessment of these children was the significance of "judgment" versus "judgment and explanation." When determining whether the child is a conserver or nonconserver, the researcher asks them which container contains more water, after which, the children are asked to explain why they made their decisions.

According to Mwamwenda (1990) this is a major factor for children failing the task. Many studies show that children(adults too) are able to make the correct judgment but fail in giving a suitable explanation. Irvine (1978)commented that "the fact that a person cannot express a certain concept does not mean that he is not capable of thinking about it." Researchers argue this is due to cultural nuisances concerning communication. Young Afrikan children have frequently become uneasy or fearful when questioned because many interpret this to mean they are wrong. This particularly was the case with Southern and West afrikan children. Also the researcher is often not sufficiently familiar with the culture and cannot evoke the correct response.

In a study of Wolof children (Greenfield, 1978), this proved to be the case. In explaining their nonconserving answers they responded that the taller glass contained "more" in it because the researcher "poured it." The Wolof reasoned that the taller glass had not only water in it but ENERGY from the experimenter who had transferred it to the water by pouring it. This denotes a distinct difference from the materialist emphasis undergirding this task. The Wolof (as do many Afrikan groups) emphasize a immaterial, energetic basis for all life. However when the aims of the task were more clearly delineated, the Wolof were able to correctly answer the question. According to Wade Nobles (1985), the Wolof as well as the researcher made a "transubstantive error," meaning that the aforementioned failed to understand the differing underlying assumptions of another cultural group and thus made an error in understanding the meaning.

Syllogistic reasoning

Syllogism is a deductive scheme of a formal argument consisting of a major and a minor premise and a conclusion.

For instance, this statement is an example of syllogistic reasoning: Every virtue is laudable;Kindness is a virtue;Therefore kindness is laudable.

In a 1970s study conducted on the Kpelle people of West Afrika (Wertsch, James, Hagstrom, Fran & Kikas, 1995), Scribner tested the Kpelle's grasp of syllogistic reasoning. When they did not could not answer the proposed syllogistic problem consistently, Scribner decided to see if they could be "taught" that form of reasoning. Through training they eventually "learned" how to answer the proposed problems correctly but when asked to create their own problem they again failed. However, the experimenter noticed consistencies among the various villagers reasoning. Specifically she noticed that the Kpelle's scenarios all had:

1) possibility for multiple answers,
2) information in the problem that didn't dictate the correct answer,
3) answers that could only be deemed "right" through group consensus.

Scribner further investigated the village "battles" where the villagers would come together and "competitors" engaged in verbal debates where the best answer would be decided by the group. This practice greatly contrasts with the underlying mutual exclusivity and either/or logic found within syllogistic reasoning. Syllogistic reasoning is highly valued and emphasized in Western fundamental culture as are the previously mentioned assumptions undergirding syllogism. This statement does not imply that syllogistic reasoning is not used in any other non-Western worldview but it does imply that withins these worldviews (particularly African) syllogism is not a highly value mode of reasoning neither are the assumptions that are fundamental to it.

***


Greenfield, P. M. (1966). On culture and conservation. In J. S. Bruner (Ed.), Studies in cognitive growth (pp. 225-256). New York: Wiley.

Irvine, J. T. (1978). Wolof "magical thinking": Culture and conservation revisited. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 9, 300-310.

Miller, J. G. & Bersoff, D. M. (1995). Development in the context of everyday family relationships: Culture, interpersonal morality, and adaptation. In M. Killen & Hart, D. (Eds.), Morality in everyday life (pp. 259-282). NY: Cambridge University Press.

Mwamwenda, T. S. (1992).Cognitive development in African children. Genetic, Social & General Psychology Monographs, 118 (1).

Nobles, W. (1985). Africanity and the Black Family, Black Family Insitute Publicaitons, CA p 103.

Tobin, J. J. Wu, D. Y. H., & Davidson, D. H. (1989). Preschool in three cultures: Japan, China and the United States. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Wertsch, J. V., Hagstrom, F. & Kikas, E. (1995). Voices of thinking and speaking. In L. Martin & K. Nelson, (Eds.), Sociocultural psychology: Theory and practice of doing and knowing. Learning in doing: Social, cognitive, and computational perspectives, (pp. 276-290). New York, US: Cambridge University Press.

____________________________
"the real pyramids were built with such precision that you can't slide a piece of paper between two 4,000 lb stones, and have shafts perfectly aligned so that you can see a tiny aperture through dozens of these mammoth blocks

the Wolof study said it all...

___________________________________
FUNTUMMIREKU-DENKYEMMIREKU
A Mythical Two-Headed Crocodile Sharing a Common Stomach. A symbol of UNITY IN DIVERSITY & WARNING AGAINST INTERNAL SQUABBLES WHERE THERE IS A COMMON DESTINY. Here's a pic: http://www.library.cornell.edu/africana/Writing_Systems/Funtummireku.html

If it works do it, if it doesn't, DO BETTER!

click here to see a pic of me: http://www.dogma-movie.com/pics/church/images/buddychrist1.jpg

(((((PEACE)))))

i was wondering, considering the post on how culture affects cognition (wolof study), if you've ever read/heard of Dr. Amos N. Wilson? from what i remember (heard a speech of his on WPFW in DC about 10 yrs ago and was mad impressed), i believe he's a clinically trained psychologist who's done extensive study on the early educational development of black children. he's authored several books, including "The Developmental Psychology Of Black Children", and "Awakening the Natural Genius of the Black Child".

i tried in vain to find them back in the day (minus the 'net as a tool, research was much harder then), but prompted by your post managed to find out that he's now deceased (read an obit on an afrocentric website), but also located his titles on amazon.com.

the developmental psychology jawn is now unfortunately out of print (i'll ask a couple of the local black bookstores if they have it), but awakening... is available. from what i recall of his speech, he references that based upon several studies (i can't vouch for how rigorous, etc., this is all recollection until i get my hands on the source), black children develop mentally at a faster rate than most white children. in the speech he was careful to mention that this is not necessarily 'better', just different. the upshot of it, however, is that the school systems here are geared for the developmental timetable of the majority, ie, white children, to the detriment of black children, with public education starting around 5 years old, instead of, say, 3 or 4. he drew the conclusion that a lot of our kids end up in situations where they are bored by the early curriculum, and miss out on learning opportunities because they are not challenged enough at a point when they could really use it. (this info doesn't exist in a vacuum of course, social conditions and poor parenting often leave a disproportionate amount of our children unprepared for even rudimentary learning because of poor parenting, and lack of preparation at home).

w/out ever seeing the book, but keeping those principles in mind, i've certainly seen it reflected in my children. they've all (3) been decidedly ahead of the curve from the time of the 'what to expect when you're expecting' type early developmental checklist books, to reaching school age, where they are all excelling, and in, or on their way to placement in the AG curricula. it's *frustrating* though, because they should be the norm. and yet i've just started tutoring a 3rd grader who's reading on a level that's barely above my kindergartener.

anyway, i'll continue searching the 'net and the real world to ge t my hands on the info, but i'm interested in whether you (or any other players) have encountered the same or similar information in your studies. again, thanks for posting the wolof study, as well as the other info, as it helps debunk the one-size fits all mentality that a lot of folks have regarding the way human beings develop and interact. (as a sidenote: i recently saw something in yahoo where in India, folks are going to start manufacturing their own condoms after studies showing that a large percentage of contraceptive failures had to do with the fact that commercially available prophylactics were ill-fitted for the average indian penis. i don't know if that means bigger/smaller/oblong/crooked or whatever, but it illustrates my point ).



peace & blessings,

x.


January is Kool Keith quote month, for lack of anything else:

"I never hearda you stupid, what's your name man??"

"Rappers don't know, I'm out the hospital/
cold buggin' and illin' like Dr. Doolittle"

"I'll chew your ass like monkeys on Wild Kingdom"

"you call yourself GOD, can you make it rain?/
can you tell me now what I'm thinkin' in my brain?"

"under your arms, you're kickin power and musty"

"word to mom, I'm in my own world.../
galaxy raaaaaays... powerful"

peace & blessings,

x.

www.twitter.com/poetx

=========================================
I'm an advocate for working smarter, not harder. If you just
focus on working hard you end up making someone else rich and
not having much to show for it. (c) mad

That sounds similar to the assessment made by Jawanza Kunjufu in "Countering the Conspiracy to Destroy Black Boys"; however, he (in the 70's) found that most of the distinterest occured around 3rd grade. I think that would put most children around 9-10.

Ananse

<--- Peace to Bayete Ross-Smith.

>That sounds similar to the assessment
>made by Jawanza Kunjufu in
>"Countering the Conspiracy to Destroy
>Black Boys";

but i read the book on some "loan" ish, and don't recall off the top what type of sources he was citing. it all makes sense from a logical/analytical perspective, but i'd like to get my hands on some rigorously documented data so that i can take it fwd to school systems and policy makers.

there's a wealth of relatively 'mainstream' data proving the correlation of teacher expectation w/ student performance, and proof of developmental differences or different learning styles woiuld supplement that nicely in influencing policy change. (ie, if you know a cool black principal of an elementary school, and can make a presentation, maybe setup a pilot program, and monitor the results).

however, he (in
>the 70's) found that most
>of the distinterest occured around
>3rd grade. I think that
>would put most children around
>9-10.

that's interesting, i'll have to go back and get that book. i think conventional (mainstream) wisdom puts the check-out age at around middle school, but third grade "sounds" more like it to me. case in point, in my kids' school systems, third grade is when official reviews are done for AG placement, and that's the onset of high stakes, end of grade testing (with which i disagree). the kid that i mentioned that i was tutoring is in the third grade, and is at the level where he can't read well enough to take tests.

i never really thought much before about how much learning compounds on itself, but he's really at the age where, if he doesn't hurry up and acquire the basic skills, he will be too far behind to meaningfully participate in school at grade level, nahmean?


>Ananse

you're my second favorite folk tale. that's also a perfect screen name.


peace & blessings,

x.

peace & blessings,

x.

www.twitter.com/poetx

=========================================
I'm an advocate for working smarter, not harder. If you just
focus on working hard you end up making someone else rich and
not having much to show for it. (c) mad

Yimhotep
>>Ananse
>
>you're my second favorite folk tale.
>that's also a perfect screen
>name.
>
>
>peace & blessings,
>
>x.


Shemhotep
************
"Be not arrogant because of your knowledge. Take counsel with the ignorant as well as with the wise. For the limits of knowledge in any field have never been set and no one has ever reached them. Wisdom is rarer than emeralds, and yet it is found among the women who gather at the grindstones."
-The Book of Ptahhotep(excerpt)

Kemetian
--------------------------------------
check it out:
www.natureworksforyou.co
m

"Pour libation for your father
and mother who rest in the
valley of the dead. God will
witness your action and
accept it. Do not forget to
do this

the dog w/ the steak, by the river.

in the picture book that i had (replete w/ pics of of a long haired white aesop, waaaay before i learned that he was an african slave), i remember a picture of a little beagle that looked like my puppy.

he was minding his own biz, walking along the river bank with a big ol' juicy steak in his mouth, when, looking down, he saw another doggy, holding another big ol fat juicy steak. he moved closer, and so did the other dog. he decided to take the "other" dog for bad and snatch his steak, then he'd have two. he lunged (necessarily letting go of his steak) at the other dog, which was his reflection in the river, pulling back only a mouthful of water. his steak had dropped into the river and was washed away by the current.

this has been SO useful to me over the years, in analyzing the actions of myself and others, particularly as it relates to relationships. i've seen so many brothers lunge for that juicier steak and end up w/ none. i ain't going out like that.

the steak could be a car, a job, a woman (or man) or whatever. but the doggy was wrong for a number of reasons:

* he didn't appreciate the steak that he had, which, if he'd thought about it, was just as juicy as the other one

* he was going to vic the other dog for the steak (bad karma, violation of the golden rule, what comes around goes around)

* he should have made sure that the object of his attention was 'real'. he gave up something tangible for a mere reflection, an illusory dream (back when i used to play ball, i knew mad cats who swore they was going to the pros even though they were just aight, likewise, brovas that i would have torn UP on the mic running around the four corners of the earth chasing a record deal :-0).

when people ask me for advice and i tell them don't be like the dog w/ the steak they look at me like i'm tripping until i break it down. then they're like, oh. thanks.

this has been poetx story hour.

peace & blessings & nighty-nite,

x. (the happy little doggy)

peace & blessings,

x.

www.twitter.com/poetx

=========================================
I'm an advocate for working smarter, not harder. If you just
focus on working hard you end up making someone else rich and
not having much to show for it. (c) mad

Yimhotep
yeah i remember that one.
Shemhotep
************
"Be not arrogant because of your knowledge. Take counsel with the ignorant as well as with the wise. For the limits of knowledge in any field have never been set and no one has ever reached them. Wisdom is rarer than emeralds, and yet it is found among the women who gather at the grindstones."
-The Book of Ptahhotep(excerpt)

Kemetian
--------------------------------------
check it out:
www.natureworksforyou.co
m

"Pour libation for your father
and mother who rest in the
valley of the dead. God will
witness your action and
accept it. Do not forget to
do this

with kids? Good stuff. I don't know if I have the patience to work with more than a handful of energetic children at one time. You have my deepest respect.

Thanks about the name.

I haven't read the Conspiracy books since highschool, so I am fuzzy about any lengthy data set. I have them at home. I can check them out and get back to you tomorrow. My cousin is in the 3rd grade. Unfortunately his parents have chosen to send him to a predomioantly White (not that there is much laternative where they are), Christian school. Their history book is (in the vernacualr of the board) GROSS. I got him selected speeches by Thomas Jefferson just to show him how much of a racist he was. He seemed to understand; he's mad smart. Right now he digests books. I am hoping that we (as a family) can get him the correct books to read. Any suggestions?

<--- Peace to Bayete Ross-Smith.

Few Thoughts to add to the IQ issue:

-Notice most of the people pontificating about how "non intelligent" black folks are, aren't qualified to develop IQ tests in the first place?

-In the Bell Curve, it notes that the gap between Black & White intelligence has narrowed to around 5 (I believe - I'll check and report back) but says it's because the number of "low scores" as decreased, not because our scores are higher overall.

Hmm, a difference of 5 when factoring in Educational differences means that Blacks would score HIGHER then whites (On Average) if you even out education.

Particularly, since Bright Black students like myself and my sister, where often put with the slower kids every year, even though we were among the brightest in our class.


E.g. We've both been reading at the college level since we were about 8/9 years old, but every year we got put in the slow reading group...kids who were close to a year behind the other kids.

-I'll dig up the information, but apparently Blacks Score higher when it comes to creativity, improvisation and "thinking out of the box".

Hmm, sounds like real intelligence to me.

Check out a guy named Samuel Jarred Taylor, just do a search on the Internet.

When you realize what he's trying to do in terms of "teaching" Blacks about their mental abilities and the differences between light skinned and dark skinned Blacks....

Well, I won't give it all away




Peace,





M2

The Blog: http://www.analyticalwealth.com/

An assassin’s life is never easy. Still, it beats being an assassin’s target.

Enjoy your money, but live below your means, lest you become a 70-yr old Wal-Mart Greeter.

Relevance?

____________________________
"the real pyramids were built with such precision that you can't slide a piece of paper between two 4,000 lb stones, and have shafts perfectly aligned so that you can see a tiny aperture through dozens of these mammoth blocks

____________________________
"the real pyramids were built with such precision that you can't slide a piece of paper between two 4,000 lb stones, and have shafts perfectly aligned so that you can see a tiny aperture through dozens of these mammoth blocks

IQ is simply *one* measure of cognitive ability, and/or one's capacity to learn/comprehend, it's just another way to say cognitive ability and is more or less what you're talking about here.

Unless I'm missing something.




Peace,



M2

The Blog: http://www.analyticalwealth.com/

An assassin’s life is never easy. Still, it beats being an assassin’s target.

Enjoy your money, but live below your means, lest you become a 70-yr old Wal-Mart Greeter.

lmao I can't BELIEVE u did this again!!!

I'm speechless...

_________________________________________________________
*moment of silence for all those lost & those yet to be found*

~~~~
http://omidele.blogspot.com/
http://rahareiki.tumblr.com/
http://seatofbliss.blogspot.com/

>lmao I can't BELIEVE u did
>this again!!!

I didn't do anything, I haven't really posted here in a week....I've largely ignored this thread because it appears to be nothing more then intellectual masturbation, it's pretty bad when you make the first 7 posts in a thread and it's just a fictional conversation with yourself.

I will say that the posts regarding studies in cognitive ability are quite interesting, particularly to me...my family members and I have a penchant for doing extremely well on cognitive ability/IQ tests and confouding white folks who don't believe we can be that intelligent






>I'm speechless...

What did I do?



Peace,




M2

The Blog: http://www.analyticalwealth.com/

An assassin’s life is never easy. Still, it beats being an assassin’s target.

Enjoy your money, but live below your means, lest you become a 70-yr old Wal-Mart Greeter.

Akwaaba

>I've largely ignored this thread
>because it appears to be
>nothing more then intellectual masturbation,

Just trying to explain the point of view from which I stem and what I mean by "Afrikan." Sorry you didn't understand this.


>it's pretty bad when you
>make the first 7 posts
>in a thread and it's
>just a fictional conversation with
>yourself.

That was the point. Each post was connected. Instead of making one huge jumbled post I separated them for clarity. Again, sorry you didn't understand that.

>me...my family members and I
>have a penchant for doing
>extremely well on cognitive ability/IQ
>tests

Why am I not surprised?

Here's why:

"On average, Afrikan persons who live in industrial (i.e. Westernized) and have been educated (i.e. enculturated) in Western schools, rate on standard levels or above on Western-based scales."

SE wo werE fi na wosankofa a yenkyi.


PEace
solarICE

Still representin' the RED, BLACK & GREEN since 1978!
EFF RED, WHITE, & BLUE*!

Ain't a damn thing changed...

*That includes the Panamanian "dummy government setup by you know who" flag.


***Something to think about***

"if the god of these religions (judaism/christianity/islam) is not above using terrorist tactics to make people believe in Him (and what's the big deal if people do Not believe in Him? God is a egomaniac) then why wouldnt the hardcore followers of these faiths have a tendency to terrorism as well?"- yuckwheat

And one more thing:
I AM NOT UTAMAROHO AND HIS VIEWS DON'T NECESSARILY REFLECT MINE!!!

____________________________
"the real pyramids were built with such precision that you can't slide a piece of paper between two 4,000 lb stones, and have shafts perfectly aligned so that you can see a tiny aperture through dozens of these mammoth blocks

>Akwaaba
>
>>I've largely ignored this thread
>>because it appears to be
>>nothing more then intellectual masturbation,
>
>Just trying to explain the point
>of view from which I
>stem and what I mean
>by "Afrikan." Sorry you
>didn't understand this.

So? That's blatantly obvious from the first sentence or two, I still think it's intellectual masturbation.

E.g. I understand what you're trying to do and I think it's intellectual Masturbation.


>>it's pretty bad when you
>>make the first 7 posts
>>in a thread and it's
>>just a fictional conversation with
>>yourself.
>
>That was the point. Each
>post was connected. Instead
>of making one huge jumbled
>post I separated them for
>clarity. Again, sorry you
>didn't understand that.

I understand that tooo......see above.

E.g. It doesn't change anything.

>>me...my family members and I
>>have a penchant for doing
>>extremely well on cognitive ability/IQ
>>tests
>
>Why am I not surprised?
>
>Here's why:
>
>"On average, Afrikan persons who live
>in industrial (i.e. Westernized) and
>have been educated (i.e. enculturated)
>in Western schools, rate on
>standard levels or above on
>Western-based scales."

Uh okay, and the point you're trying to make is? It should be obvious that I'm not surprised by that, just irritated that a lot of Whites try to porport the opposite as fact.



Peace,







M2

The Blog: http://www.analyticalwealth.com/

An assassin’s life is never easy. Still, it beats being an assassin’s target.

Enjoy your money, but live below your means, lest you become a 70-yr old Wal-Mart Greeter.

:) glad to see your post here....id ont come here much but i do check for your posts when you put them up..

i scored well on IQ tests OFTEN growing up....and that shocked the white folks who gave them to us in school (parents too)...IQ tests have always been questionable...most of the reasons why you put up in your post.

taint nothin like hard work and studying to REALLY show who CAN DO WELL and WHO CANT DO WELL in academia...you know?

RC



I hear voices and i can't stand to be alone
'Cause emptiness is all I've ever known
Soiled by my lust I feel no shame
No longer forsaken
when they call my name
No one is faithful
I am weak
I go astray
Forgive me for my ways
- FROM "FAITHFUL"

"Are you free?"

Get Out the Room
https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/get-out-the-room/id525657893

Some of y'all need this in your life: http://www.psychology.com

the title was addressed towards you, but the rest of it was to Solarus...

sorry for tha confusion

_________________________________________________________
*moment of silence for all those lost & those yet to be found*

~~~~
http://omidele.blogspot.com/
http://rahareiki.tumblr.com/
http://seatofbliss.blogspot.com/

intellectual masturbation? thats an unecessary shot.
im learning from it..

...one of them is general. I think there's immense value in interviewing yourself (I've done it several times), but one thing was pointed out to me after the first time that I think would be of relevance.

My teacher said: "You're not asking yourself the hard questions. Or rather, you're asking yourself questions that seem hard, but that you actually have an answer prepared for."

Then he said:

"You're not truly interviewing yourself unless at least some of your answers are 'I don't know.'"


>These "tangibles"
>that you speak of are
>meaningless by themselves. It is
>the PURPOSE of a thing,
>that is of importance.

Yup. I loved this.

>SOlarus: Correction: YOU created this monolithic Afrika with a >"K" and expect me to make gross generalizations about how each >Afrikan lives, breathes and acts.

Who is "YOU?"

>When I first started posting on these boards I avoided using >the phrase "Afrikan culture" because I was aware of how >misleading that phrase can be. Normally I used the terms >"Afrikan conceptual system" or "worldview" as those were more >specific.

Sorry, but you consider "worldview" and "conceptual system" to be specific?

I think you *do* indeed generalize about what is and isn't "Afrikan," and in reading this I wanted to know how you were going to face up to that question...because it's one that I (as one of the crew you and others have inscrutably dubbed "universalist") always ask.

I think many of us generalize, and I think the key is to understand the purpose of that generalization, and where it points you. If, say, we want to talk about the peculiarly western conception of "romantic love," we need to understand that the distinctions we're making between Afrikan/Western are intended to increase our REAL understanding of both ON THEIR OWN TERMS (i.e. not as opposites of the other).

>Solarus: First let me say that
>I rarely make those distinctions
>of what is "non-Afrikan" or
>"Afrikan."

That's a lie, at least according to my experience on this board.
"Don't lie to yourself" should be another rule of interviewing yourself.


>Furthermore I don't speak in absolute
>terms, so basically to say
>"Afrikan" or "non-Afrikan" should be
>understood in terms of "tendency."

Fair enough.

>Let me reiterate again, CULTURE
>IS NOT STATIC. Culture is
>DYNAMIC.

Exactly. Which is why I think it's very odd to talk about Afrikan culture as distinct from what it is now. This was the problem of countless anthropologists in the early 20th century.
They were obsessed with "pure" cultural forms, and assumed that cultural products didn't evolve in "traditional" cultures.

If we didn't recognize guitars from their presence in America and other places in the world, we would have thought that it was a traditional instrument in "Afrikan culture." It's just been incorporated over the last 300 years.

>Despite these changes one can see
>dominant themes within traditional cultural
>cores. When I say something
>is "non-Afrikan," this is in
>reference to motives and reasonings
>for a given behavior that
>is not endemic of traditional
>Afrikan dominant themes.

...which you perceived at their origin? Nope.
If we're taking our knowledge of "traditional" Afrikan culture from ANY form of history (including internal oral narrative or early internal cultural artifacts), we're getting that "tradition" through the lens of a constantly evolving cultural core.

In other words, there's no way to say what's endemic of tradition.

Back for more.

Alek
______________________________________
LEFT side of the bedroom, fool!
What?! What?!

____________________________
LEFT side of the bedroom, fool!
What? What?

Akwaaba


>"You're not truly interviewing yourself unless
>at least some of your
>answers are 'I don't know.'"

Point taken.


>>SOlarus: Correction: YOU created this monolithic Afrika with a >"K" and expect me to make gross generalizations about how each >Afrikan lives, breathes and acts.
>
>Who is "YOU?"

In the following case: OKAR. This also applies those who make statements along the same lines and the ficitional interviewer.

>
>>When I first started posting on these boards I avoided using >the phrase "Afrikan culture" because I was aware of how >misleading that phrase can be. Normally I used the terms >"Afrikan conceptual system" or "worldview" as those were more >specific.
>
>Sorry, but you consider "worldview" and
>"conceptual system" to be specific?

Not "specific" but "more specific than culture." "Culture" many aspects than a "worldview" or "conceptual system" (which incidentally are apart of culture.


>I think you *do* indeed generalize
>about what is and isn't
>"Afrikan," and in reading this
>I wanted to know how
>you were going to face
>up to that question...because it's
>one that I (as one
>of the crew you and
>others have inscrutably dubbed "universalist")
>always ask.

I do generalize. (Didn't I admit this in the "Interview?").

>
>I think many of us generalize,
>and I think the key
>is to understand the purpose
>of that generalization, and where
>it points you. If,
>say, we want to talk
>about the peculiarly western conception
>of "romantic love," we need
>to understand that the distinctions
>we're making between Afrikan/Western are
>intended to increase our REAL
>understanding of both ON THEIR
>OWN TERMS (i.e. not as
>opposites of the other).

Agreed. On a sidenote, I don't believe that the Western nor Afrikan worldviews are opposite, only that they c

>>Solarus: First let me say that
>>I rarely make those distinctions
>>of what is "non-Afrikan" or
>>"Afrikan."
>
>That's a lie, at least according
>to my experience on this
>board.
>"Don't lie to yourself" should be
>another rule of interviewing yourself.

"Rarely" in terms of subject matter versus frequency. Frequency, yeah i do it alot but I consciously limit it to certain subjects (like the ones I mentioned). The statement was misleading.


>>Let me reiterate again, CULTURE
>>IS NOT STATIC. Culture is
>>DYNAMIC.
>
>Exactly. Which is why I
>think it's very odd to
>talk about Afrikan culture as
>distinct from what it is
>now. This was the
>problem of countless anthropologists in
>the early 20th century.
>They were obsessed with "pure" cultural
>forms, and assumed that cultural
>products didn't evolve in "traditional"
>cultures.
>
>If we didn't recognize guitars from
>their presence in America and
>other places in the world,
>we would have thought that
>it was a traditional instrument
>in "Afrikan culture." It's
>just been incorporated over the
>last 300 years.
>
>>Despite these changes one can see
>>dominant themes within traditional cultural
>>cores. When I say something
>>is "non-Afrikan," this is in
>>reference to motives and reasonings
>>for a given behavior that
>>is not endemic of traditional
>>Afrikan dominant themes.
>
>...which you perceived at their origin?
> Nope.
>If we're taking our knowledge of
>"traditional" Afrikan culture from ANY
>form of history (including internal
>oral narrative or early internal
>cultural artifacts), we're getting that
>"tradition" through the lens of
>a constantly evolving cultural core.
>
>
>In other words, there's no way
>to say what's endemic of
>tradition.

Maybe "tradition" needs to be defined or another word used. The concept that I am aiming at here is the consistency of certain themes throughout the evolution of the core.

SE wo werE fi na wosankofa a yenkyi.


PEace
solarICE

Still representin' the RED, BLACK & GREEN since 1978!
EFF RED, WHITE, & BLUE*!

Ain't a damn thing changed...

*That includes the Panamanian "dummy government setup by you know who" flag.


***Something to think about***

"if the god of these religions (judaism/christianity/islam) is not above using terrorist tactics to make people believe in Him (and what's the big deal if people do Not believe in Him? God is a egomaniac) then why wouldnt the hardcore followers of these faiths have a tendency to terrorism as well?"- yuckwheat

And one more thing:
I AM NOT UTAMAROHO AND HIS VIEWS DON'T NECESSARILY REFLECT MINE!!!

____________________________
"the real pyramids were built with such precision that you can't slide a piece of paper between two 4,000 lb stones, and have shafts perfectly aligned so that you can see a tiny aperture through dozens of these mammoth blocks

>>>SOlarus: Correction: YOU created this monolithic Afrika with a >"K" and expect me to make gross generalizations about how each >Afrikan lives, breathes and acts.
>>
>>Who is "YOU?"
>
>In the following case: OKAR.
>This also applies those who
>make statements along the same
>lines and the ficitional interviewer.

The reason why I asked this is that I've seen a certain amount of semi-blind nationalism on the part of Africans and African-Americans that seeks to create and preserve that monolith of "Afrika" in order to forge some kind of cultural pride and national identity.

I don't really think that's a bad thing, either, but it's still problematic (and I'd guess that you have problems with it too).

>>Sorry, but you consider "worldview" and
>>"conceptual system" to be specific?

>Not "specific" but "more specific than
>culture." "Culture" many aspects than
>a "worldview" or "conceptual system"
>(which incidentally are apart of
>culture.

Fine, but the terms "worldview" and "conceptual system" are still applied on a broad broad scale to entire continents of people...e.g. "But what you need to understand is that the Afrikan worldview provides for..."

Still doesn't seem that specific to me.

>Frequency, yeah i
>do it alot but I
>consciously limit it to certain
>subjects (like the ones I
>mentioned). The statement was
>misleading.

Gotcha. Yes, I agree. And I think that as far as religion is concerned, generalizations are still problematic (how many distinct religions are there on the African continent...hundreds?)

I mean, African muslims (among which there's also plenty of variety...those that practice islam vs. those that actually have Arabic descendants, for instance) come in all shapes and sizes.

>Maybe "tradition" needs to be defined
>or another word used.
>The concept that I am
>aiming at here is the
>consistency of certain themes throughout
>the evolution of the core.

Okay, point taken. What I STILL think (and I'm on a big post-modern reflexivity kick) is that WE in the present shape our understanding of that evolution in the core.

For instance, our country's patriotic historians want us to perceive our cultural evolution as a trajectory towards free society and the ideals of liberty. As such, that's pretty much how Americans view America. It's the "shining beacon to the world" theory.

However, I think one can also see America's evolution as the relentless development of a self-sustaining ethos, one capable of being both "conscious/responsible" and completely detached at the same time. Some would say that, at our cultural core, our country is about the perfection of imperialism in all its forms.

So I think our understanding of the "evolution of the cultural core" can be severely comprimised as well.

Basically, all we've got is the present, and that's hyper-jaded (reflexivity again) already.

Really good discussion, thanks man.

Alek

I also love this:

>And one more thing:
>I AM NOT UTAMAROHO AND HIS
>VIEWS DON'T NECESSARILY REFLECT MINE!!!
>

heheheheh. Don't fight it (c) Mick Jagger.

Alek
______________________________________
LEFT side of the bedroom, fool!
What?! What?!

____________________________
LEFT side of the bedroom, fool!
What? What?

Akwaaba

>The reason why I asked this
>is that I've seen a
>certain amount of semi-blind nationalism
>on the part of Africans
>and African-Americans that seeks to
>create and preserve that monolith
>of "Afrika" in order to
>forge some kind of cultural
>pride and national identity.
>
>I don't really think that's a
>bad thing, either, but it's
>still problematic (and I'd guess
>that you have problems with
>it too).

Yeah I do. It's understandable but its gross (unrefined, unrealistic and naive< "gross" is multifaceted >). It was fine and necessary in its beginning stages (especially in early 20th century and late 60s) but now it needs to surpass that level. (((REFINEMENT)))

>Okay, point taken. What I
>STILL think (and I'm on
>a big post-modern reflexivity kick)
>is that WE in the
>present shape our understanding of
>that evolution in the core.
>
>
>For instance, our country's patriotic historians
>want us to perceive our
>cultural evolution as a trajectory
>towards free society and the
>ideals of liberty. As
>such, that's pretty much how
>Americans view America. It's
>the "shining beacon to the
>world" theory.

I agree. We always shape our "culture." Going back to martial arts, as every style is shapes the individual's thinking but the style is "re-shape" through individual expression. This reciprocal process is the cause of dynamism.

>
>However, I think one can also
>see America's evolution as the
>relentless development of a self-sustaining
>ethos, one capable of being
>both "conscious/responsible" and completely detached
>at the same time.
>Some would say that, at
>our cultural core, our country
>is about the perfection of
>imperialism in all its forms.
>
>So I think our understanding of
>the "evolution of the cultural
>core" can be severely comprimised
>as well.

Think of the difference between early Americans and the British. They WERE the same people but their new experiences on what was a new and strange land to them, made them change previously held patterns of thinking. No more king, separation of church of state, etc. were all forms of extreme competitive individualism. This doesn't mean individualism was not a value of previous British culture but the trait because more expressed and valued in the growing American culture because early Americans had to rely on their own actions, thoughts, and decisions for survival.

"A king across the sea living in a phat castle putting taxes on me when I can barely feed my family???? FUCK DAT! I'm gonna GIT MINE!!" <- these rappers ain't said nuttin new.

On a rhetorical flipside, would the same sort of mentality be developed amongst a group such as the Kikuyu, of East Afrika who value communalism to the degree that if a member of the village dies of starvation, the other members of that village are ridiculed, condemned, and scolded by members of other vilages; where the wealthy who have made their won wealth through free enterprise and resourceful actions, are still expected to at the very least clothe and feed poorer members of their villages?

Therefore I'm saying that although we do create our own culture, it is not created within a rootless vaccum. The culture is already eastablished and manifested, we only "tweek" it.

SE wo werE fi na wosankofa a yenkyi.

PEace
solarICE

Still representin' the RED, BLACK & GREEN since 1978!
EFF RED, WHITE, & BLUE*!

Ain't a damn thing changed...

*That includes the Panamanian "dummy government setup by you know who" flag.


***Something to think about***

"if the god of these religions (judaism/christianity/islam) is not above using terrorist tactics to make people believe in Him (and what's the big deal if people do Not believe in Him? God is a egomaniac) then why wouldnt the hardcore followers of these faiths have a tendency to terrorism as well?"- yuckwheat

And one more thing:
I AM NOT UTAMAROHO AND HIS VIEWS DON'T NECESSARILY REFLECT MINE!!!

____________________________
"the real pyramids were built with such precision that you can't slide a piece of paper between two 4,000 lb stones, and have shafts perfectly aligned so that you can see a tiny aperture through dozens of these mammoth blocks

>I agree. We always shape
>our "culture."

Ah, but that's not what I said. I said that we shape the HISTORY of our culture as we shape our culture in the present.
Which is why I have trouble with any assertion about "lasting trends" in a cultural core

i.e. "communalism," which you've put forward as a generalized part of the Afrikan cultural core...

...but such generalization is (I think) VERY MUCH shaped by our western reaction to the strangeness of real cultural contact with Afrika in the last 100 years. As in: "Oh, they don't have a 300 year tradition of free-market capitalism over there in East Africa...they must be a more communal culture."

And ALSO, the way African's themselves describe their culture is shaped by their present cultural core...much of which is (understandably) a reaction to colonialism/imperialism.
There is a great push to differentiate and preserve...which is why (again in the realm of music, sorry) the so-called "neo-traditionalist" musicians in the post-colonial nationalist period were lauded by African leaders as practicers of "true" or "pure" traditional African music culture.

And that was pretty much crap...as anyone familiar with Salif Keita's work could tell you. He's performing music he learned a few decades ago...and for him (or us) to assume that it's the same as it was 500 years ago is completely naive.

Did that explain what I'm trying to get at?

>Think of the difference between early
>Americans and the British.
>They WERE the same people
>but their new experiences on
>what was a new and
>strange land to them, made
>them change previously held patterns
>of thinking. No more
>king, separation of church of
>state, etc. were all forms
>of extreme competitive individualism.
>This doesn't mean individualism was
>not a value of previous
>British culture but the trait
>because more expressed and valued
>in the growing American culture
>because early Americans had to
>rely on their own actions,
>thoughts, and decisions for survival.

Right. So, in other words, the cultural value of "individualism" was developed at a certain time...it isn't part of some constant cultural core that will always exist through all our evolutions (for instance, now that we're increasingly doing nothing for ourselves and our jobs are disappearing, will those cultural values evolve?).

>On a rhetorical flipside, would the
>same sort of mentality
>be developed amongst a group
>such as the Kikuyu, of
>East Afrika who value communalism
>to the degree that if
>a member of the village
>dies of starvation, the other
>members of that village are
>ridiculed, condemned, and scolded by
>members of other vilages; where
>the wealthy who have made
>their won wealth through free
>enterprise and resourceful actions, are
>still expected to at the
>very least clothe and feed
>poorer members of their villages?

Maybe, if they moved to a new, completely different land on their own. But, Solarus, the fact that a certain group of people share a cultural value doesn't mean that said value is at the cultural "core" of that people. For instance, I'm not convinced that justice IS at the cultural core of America. Same goes for tolerance. Yet we certainly display those characteristics and pledge them to be a part of our culture.

>Therefore I'm saying that although we
>do create our own culture,
>it is not created within
>a rootless vaccum. The
>culture is already eastablished and
>manifested, we only "tweek" it.

Really? I have plans to do a little more than "tweak" ours.
Me and uta, man.

Alek
______________________________________
LEFT side of the bedroom, fool!
What?! What?!

____________________________
LEFT side of the bedroom, fool!
What? What?

Yimhotep

>>Think of the difference between early
>>Americans and the British.
>>They WERE the same people
>>but their new experiences on
>>what was a new and
>>strange land to them, made
>>them change previously held patterns
>>of thinking. No more
>>king, separation of church of
>>state, etc. were all forms
>>of extreme competitive individualism.
>>This doesn't mean individualism was
>>not a value of previous
>>British culture but the trait
>>because more expressed and valued
>>in the growing American culture
>>because early Americans had to
>>rely on their own actions,
>>thoughts, and decisions for survival.
>
>Right. So, in other words,
>the cultural value of "individualism"
>was developed at a certain
>time...it isn't part of some
>constant cultural core that will
>always exist through all our
>evolutions (for instance, now that
>we're increasingly doing nothing for
>ourselves and our jobs are
>disappearing, will those cultural values
>evolve?).

i disagree. individualism was a part of the British system AND a part of the American system, itjust manifested itself in diff. ways, it can therefore be said that individualism _is_ a part of their cultural core, it persists despite the removal from their native land, it persisted in their native land and was a part of the culture b4 that of their native land. longevity is key. i think the question of its (cultural core's) existence through a ppl's evolutions can only be determined _after_ it can be said w/o doubt that said ppl are truly evolving.


>>On a rhetorical flipside, would the
>>same sort of mentality
>>be developed amongst a group
>>such as the Kikuyu, of
>>East Afrika who value communalism
>>to the degree that if
>>a member of the village
>>dies of starvation, the other
>>members of that village are
>>ridiculed, condemned, and scolded by
>>members of other vilages; where
>>the wealthy who have made
>>their won wealth through free
>>enterprise and resourceful actions, are
>>still expected to at the
>>very least clothe and feed
>>poorer members of their villages?
>
>Maybe, if they moved to a
>new, completely different land on
>their own. But, Solarus,
>the fact that a certain
>group of people share a
>cultural value doesn't mean that
>said value is at the
>cultural "core" of that people.

this is true, but i don't think he is saying that. a values at the cultural core when they show up again and again despite changes in the enviroment (due to colonialism and oppression or due to a time of great wealth). when certain values persist despite the change, that's when it can be said that it's it the cultural "core" of a ppl.

> For instance, I'm not
>convinced that justice IS at
>the cultural core of America.
> Same goes for tolerance.
> Yet we certainly display
>those characteristics and pledge them
>to be a part of
>our culture.

again i think the point is how long have these characteristics been displayed over time? do they persist, or only "show up" in times of crises? when they persist despite the changes then they can be said to be a part of a "core".


>>Therefore I'm saying that although we
>>do create our own culture,
>>it is not created within
>>a rootless vaccum. The
>>culture is already eastablished and
>>manifested, we only "tweek" it.
>
>Really? I have plans to
>do a little more than
>"tweak" ours.
>Me and uta, man.
>

Question: what do u c as "our" culture? some characteristics of it that is. u can point me to the link if u've already done it.


Shemhotep
************
"Be not arrogant because of your knowledge. Take counsel with the ignorant as well as with the wise. For the limits of knowledge in any field have never been set and no one has ever reached them. Wisdom is rarer than emeralds, and yet it is found among the women who gather at the grindstones."
-The Book of Ptahhotep(excerpt)

Kemetian
--------------------------------------
check it out:
www.natureworksforyou.co
m

"Pour libation for your father
and mother who rest in the
valley of the dead. God will
witness your action and
accept it. Do not forget to
do this

>i disagree. individualism was a part
>of the British system AND
>a part of the American
>system, itjust manifested itself in
>diff. ways, it can therefore
>be said that individualism _is_
>a part of their cultural
>core, it persists despite the
>removal from their native land,
>it persisted in their native
>land and was a part
>of the culture b4 that
>of their native land.

Agreed. I actually do think (and thanks for getting me back to this thought), that the imperialist/entitlement drive is closely tied to individualism, and that *both* came over on the Mayflower.

But we *did* evolve, even in our cultural core.
Our newer culture was built around fairly intense puritan ideals, which is why (in a nutshell) England doesn't freak out about sex on TV etc.

>a values at the cultural
>core when they show up
>again and again despite changes
>in the enviroment (due to
>colonialism and oppression or due
>to a time of great
>wealth). when certain values persist
>despite the change, that's when
>it can be said that
>it's it the cultural "core"
>of a ppl.

Well, here you're going to run into a shitload of problems.

Many African countries are partially or largely westernized in their cultural practice. Where did the greedy African mine-owners or dictators come from, if "communalism" persists at the cultural core of African society? Isn't it supposed to manifest itself, and isn't it supposed to RESIST temporary or conditional changes in the world?

This isn't an accusation. I'm just saying, I'm not sure you can have it both ways. If you want to say (and I think you'd be right) that Western thought and practice corrupted African societies, then you have to acknowledge that those societies -- even at their core -- can be corrupted. Or that they can and do evolve.

>again i think the point is
>how long have these characteristics
>been displayed over time? do
>they persist, or only "show
>up" in times of crises?
>when they persist despite the
>changes then they can be
>said to be a part
>of a "core".

See above.

>>Really? I have plans to
>>do a little more than
>>"tweak" ours.
>>Me and uta, man.

>Question: what do u c as
>"our" culture? some characteristics of
>it that is.

Shit. Well, like I said, I think one aspect is the drive to perfect imperialism and maximize our own reward.

Another is a drive to homogenize.

Another is an unrelenting drive to create and re-shape.

Another huge one (tied to the last), is an emphasis on novelty.

Plenty more where that came from.

Alek

______________________________________
LEFT side of the bedroom, fool!
What?! What?!

____________________________
LEFT side of the bedroom, fool!
What? What?

>If you want to "feel" Afrikan culture, go on a date with a South Afrikan.

So if I go on a date with Charlize Theron I will be able to "feel" Afrikan culture?
Cool, thanks for the tip. Now if I can just get Charlize's digits...


40th Street Black knocks 'em out...
_________________________________________________________________

"I thought I was hip until George and Weezie showed me that I was a just a square white peg in a round black world"
- Marcy D'Arcy

"Yeah man, I tell ya what, man. That dang ol' Internet, man. You just go on there and point and click. Talk about W-W-dot-W-com.
An' lotsa nekkid chicks on there, man. Click. Click. Click. Click. Click. It's real easy, man." - Boomhauer

___________________

Mar-A-Lago delenda est

____________________________
"the real pyramids were built with such precision that you can't slide a piece of paper between two 4,000 lb stones, and have shafts perfectly aligned so that you can see a tiny aperture through dozens of these mammoth blocks