some people believe that person 's culture is defined by their country origin,while other believe that only a minor influence .discuss both view and give your opinion

Human's heritage, ponder by some masses that can be described by their birth place-means in which nation they are born, whereas few opine that birth country has minute concern with person's lifestyle. This is a countervailing notion, even though, i am certainly agree with a former belief as, place of origin affects one's language, moral, clothing style and decorum. Preliminary, people are recognized by their locality since, nativeness profoundly attached with one's demeanor. Because, it plays crucial role in one's upbringing and not only defined people's belief but also their rituals and cultural festivals. For instance, if someone emigrate to other country as America from India, will the one refute to celebrate diwali, rakshabandhan and other traditional customs of one's particular heritage? The answer is "No". As the person's native place is India, one will continuously wear India heritage cloths and cherish other festive occasions owing to cultural roots. Secondly, despite the indigenous, people can opt to change their lifestyle as they want to in this independent world. With a globalization and advancement, people are altering their way of life to reach co-operative expectation. To exemplify, "The Forbes" revealed in one article that 70 % masses adopting western culture lest they should compete in their stream and get their promotion. what is said in argument, is true, but for changing their attitude rather than indulge in their traditional values, they have minor opportunities in this commercialized era. I convicted that apart from globalization, collateral customs are a fundamental part of human being.