Hide this

Results from Google Books

Click on a thumbnail to go to Google Books.

The Geography of Thought: How Asians and Westerners Think Differently...and Why by Richard E. Nisbett
Loading...

The Geography of Thought: How Asians and Westerners Think…

by Richard E. Nisbett

MembersReviewsPopularityAverage ratingConversations
302517,947 (3.71)2
Loading...
won't like will probably not like will probably like will like will love

Sign up for LibraryThing to find out whether you'll like this book.

Showing 5 of 5
I've lent this book out to a couple of friends so far (Chinese). I've also discussed it with Chinese friends and what the author reports here is very real and, I feel, relevant. Having tried some of the experiments on myself I begin to understand why I, a westerner, prefer to live in China - I gave the same answers that Chinese (and Japanese) typically do. The observations of this book dovetail rather nicely with Bart Kosko's 'Fuzzy Thinking' in that it seems that western minds typically are categorizing (after Aristotle) whereas eastern ones are relationship oriented. This is by conditioning obviously, not any result of genetics. Fascinating and raises many more questions than it answers. ( )
  abraxalito | Aug 8, 2008 |
This book gave me a deep insight in the way the west and east cultures think. There is a difference between this two worlds and Nisbett gives many examples, that support this view. The future may tell if the two cultural biased systems converge.
  heindl | Jun 1, 2008 |
Existential
  Nicktee1949 | Mar 28, 2007 |
This book discusses the ways in which Chinese (or perhaps "Confucian") ways of thinking differ from American (or perhaps Western) ways.

We've all heard the standard stories about this, how East Asians have more concern with family, say things less directly, blah blah; but he goes into the issues in substantially more detail, covering not just the superficial but also much more subtle things like how East Asians, literally, do see the world differently. For example when shown two pictures with slight differences between them, Americans focus on the foreground objects and can tell you what the differences were between these foreground objects, whereas East Asians focus on the background objects and can tell you what their differences were.

Along the same lines, we are told that Chinese has no words for (and thus can't distinguish between) different concepts like "a duck", "the duck", or "ducks" (as a class).
[On the other hand, having read more books on language since this one, I'm now
somewhat sceptical of this sort of claim. Russian, for example, a reasonably Western language, if not a canonical one, also does not have a definite or indefinite article, but achieves the same result through word order. I suspect that Chinese likewise has its ways of making these distinctions.]

Another example was things like providing three words (say [panda, monkey, banana]) and asking which two should be grouped together.
To me (and most Americans) the natural grouping, in the absence of other information, is (panda and monkey are both animals), but for East Asians the natural grouping is (monkey eats banana).

It's not a perfect book, but I think that, to some extent reflects the newness of the field. I'd like to see another book, by a different author, in a few years, seeing what future study says. ( )
  name99 | Nov 14, 2006 |
Showing 5 of 5
no reviews | add a review
You must log in to edit Common Knowledge data.
For more help see the Common Knowledge help page.
Series (with order)
Canonical Title
Original publication date
People/Characters
Important places
Important events
Related movies
Awards and honors
Epigraph
Dedication
First words
Quotations
Last words
Disambiguation notice
Publisher's editors
Blurbers

References to this work on external resources.

Wikipedia in English

None

Book description

Amazon.com Book Description (ISBN 0743216466, Hardcover)

Everyone knows that while different cultures may think about the world differently, they use the same equipment for doing their thinking. Everyone knows that whatever the skin color, nationality, or religion, every human being uses the same tools for perception, for memory, and for reasoning. Everyone knows that a logically true statement is true in English, German, or Hindi. Everyone knows that when a Chinese and an American look at the same painting, they see the same painting.

But what if everyone is wrong?

When psychologist Richard E. Nisbett showed an animated underwater scene to his American students, they zeroed in on a big fish swimming among smaller fish. Japanese subjects, on the other hand, made observations about the background environment -- and the different "seeings" are a clue to profound underlying cognitive differences between Westerners and East Asians. For, as Professor Nisbett shows in The Geography of Thought, people actually think about -- and even see -- the world differently because of differing ecologies, social structures, philosophies, and educational systems that date back to ancient Greece and China and that have survived into the modern world. As a result, East Asian thought is "holistic" -- drawn to the perceptual field as a whole and to relations among objects and events within that field. By comparison to Western modes of reasoning, East Asian thought relies far less on categories or on formal logic; it is fundamentally dialectic, seeking a "middle way" between opposing thoughts. By contrast, Westerners focus on salient objects or people, use attributes to assign them to catergories, and apply rules of formal logic to understand their behavior.

The Geography of Thought documents Professor Nisbett's groundbreaking international research in cultural psychology, a series of comparative studies both persuasive in their rigor and startling in their conclusions, addressing questions such as:

• Why did the ancient Chinese excel at algebra and arithmetic, but not geometry, the brilliant achievement of such Greeks as Euclid?

• Why do East Asians find it so difficult to disentangle an object from its surroundings?

• Why do Western infants learn nouns more rapidly than verbs, when it is the other way around in East Asia?

• What are the implications of these cognitive differences for the future of international politics? Do they support a Fukuyamaesque "end of history" scenario or a Huntingtonian "clash of civilizations"?

From feng shui to metaphysics, from comparative linguistics to economic history, a gulf separates the children of Aristotle from the descendants of Confucius. At a moment in history when the need for cross-cultural understanding and collaboration have never been more important, The Geography of Thought offers both a map to that gulf and a blueprint for a bridge that might be able to span it.

(retrieved from Amazon Fri, 24 Apr 2009 07:57:53 -0400)

(see all 2 descriptions)

The first test round has been closed. Visit the Open Shelves Classification group for details.

Quick Links

Ebooks Audio Swap
0/62

Popular covers

 

Help/FAQs | About | Privacy/Terms | Blog | Contact | LibraryThing.com | APIs | WikiThing | Common Knowledge | 46,525,752 books!