The article is about how Caucuasians and Asians see faces differently.
The very statement reveals several analytically pathetic assumptions:
One. Caucasians have a common way of viewing the face.
Two. Caucasians are a race or group with common features.
Three. Asians have a common way of viewing the face.
Four. Asians are a race or group with common features.
Five. Asians are a group different from Caucasians.
Six. The designation of Asian and Caucasian need not be differentiated as to culture and ethnicity. That is, you don't have to specify someone whose ancestry is Asian as opposed to somebody whose culture is Asian.
This study would seem to imply that all the land from Indonesia, Korea, and from India to the Phillipines is inhabited by a single group.
What does it actually mean to say Caucasians and Asians? Most likely, yellow people and white people.
The clever bit about this piece is that it fits the simplistic ideas of cultural homogeneity and exclusivity, where different cultures inhabit different realities, and it also fits the evolutionary psychology oversimplifications, wherein, Caucasians and Asians have a separate phylogeny and therefore the needs of face recognition evolved differently.
I can't help but feel that such all-inclusive talk of Asians is never far from the Confucian Culture nonsense, and, perhaps, to some explanation of how they're all conformists because of their collective emphasis in facial recognition.
Good god. Take Chinese people for example. Try to get them to collectivize in the name of Confucian values. Or just talk to one about their experience working for or with other Chinese people, and compare what you find with The Analects.
No comments:
Post a Comment