Every country has its unique culture that defines the fabric of its society. It is debated that the country of origin has a major influence on a person's culture. I will discuss and provide evidence on both sides of the debate in this essay and justify my opinion that a person's culture is minimally influenced by their country of origin.
Every county's tradition stems from its history. Most countries have religious and race wars in its past that has defined its society. Speaking about the world's largest democracy, India; it is a melting pot of different religions which comes with different beliefs and cultures. With 33 official languages and seven recognized religions, citizens of India share about a hundred festivals among each other. These customs and traditions have been ingrained in Indian society for the past 1000 years. One such value system that defines culture of an individual is identified in ancient scriptures. These scriptures have "respect your elders" engrained almost everywhere. Any child born in this society, typically, does not raise their voice against elders. While this has had both positive and negative impacts, acknowledging that a person's culture is defined by their country of origin is accurate in many ways.
With advent of technology and globalization, information has been decentralized and distributed in the best possible way. This means people are exposed to other cultures and have even gone ahead to imbibe them. This action of adopting a culture that speaks to one self, refutes the claim that a person's country of origin has a major influence on their culture. To give an example, a close friend of mine who was born India, is drawn to the culture of United States. She likes the freedom here and as an atheist can live without judgement in the Unites States as compared to the oppressive environment she grew up in. In no way does she represent the narrow and conservative ideologies shared by her family. That's where her country of origin does not have any influence on her personal culture.
In this day and age where social media has broken the boundaries of communication, I am of the opinion that every person cultivates their own culture and beliefs. Thus the country of origin might give you a know-how of a single culture but the exposure in one's daily life to global media will inculcate culture and beliefs of all countries.
In conclusion, level of influence that one's country of origin has on a person's culture is debatable and you have see in the essay how both sides of the argument are equally valid. With that said, I'm of the belief that globalization and technology have made it very difficult for a person to be siloed by their own country's culture and that it has a very minor influence.
Every
country
has its unique
culture
that defines the fabric of its
society
. It
is debated
that the
country
of
origin
has a major
influence
on a
person's
culture
. I will discuss and provide evidence on both sides of the debate in this essay and justify my opinion that a
person's
culture
is
minimally
influenced by their
country
of origin.
Every county's tradition stems from its history. Most
countries
have religious and race wars in its past that has defined its
society
. Speaking about the world's largest democracy, India; it is a melting pot of
different
religions which
comes
with
different
beliefs
and
cultures
. With 33 official languages and seven recognized religions, citizens of India share about a hundred festivals among each other. These customs and traditions have
been ingrained
in Indian
society
for the past 1000 years. One such value system that defines
culture
of an individual
is identified
in ancient scriptures. These scriptures have
"
respect your elders
"
engrained
almost everywhere. Any child born in this
society
,
typically
, does not raise their voice against elders. While this has had both
positive
and
negative
impacts, acknowledging that a
person's
culture
is defined
by their
country
of
origin
is accurate in
many
ways.
With advent of technology and globalization, information has
been decentralized
and distributed in the best possible way. This means
people
are exposed
to other
cultures
and have even gone ahead to imbibe them. This action of adopting a
culture
that speaks to one self, refutes the claim that a
person's
country
of
origin
has a major
influence
on their
culture
. To give an example, a close friend of mine who
was born
India,
is drawn
to the
culture
of United States
. She likes the freedom here and as an atheist can
live
without judgement in the Unites States as compared to the oppressive environment she grew up in. In no way does she represent the narrow and conservative ideologies shared by her family. That's where her
country
of
origin
does not have any
influence
on her personal culture.
In this day and age where social media has broken the boundaries of communication, I am of the opinion that every person cultivates their
own
culture
and
beliefs
.
Thus
the
country
of
origin
might give you a know-how of a single
culture
but
the exposure in one's daily life to global media will inculcate
culture
and
beliefs
of all countries.
In conclusion
, level of
influence
that one's
country
of
origin
has on a
person's
culture
is
debatable and
you have
see
in the essay how both sides of the argument are
equally
valid. With that said, I'm of the
belief
that globalization and technology have made it
very
difficult for a person to
be siloed
by their
own
country's
culture
and that it has a
very
minor
influence
.