3 ms·

Thanks for your comment. The sentiment I recall is, for instance, related to a thief that's running away after having just stolen a purse and you have the abili

Thanks for your comment. The sentiment I recall is, for instance, related to a thief that's running away after having just stolen a purse and you have the ability to stop him. It was said in regards to big city living and making yourself part of the act in some manner, where you might get pulled into the police station to make a statement and spend hours on something you didn't want to be a part of. Again, I've never set foot in the country, so I can't say either way. Another smaller example might be someone is talking on their cell phone on the train, and thus a Japanese person wouldn't go up to the one yapping on the phone to tell them it's rude, per Japanese standards.

mikekchar 10y ago
Oh I see. Yes, in that instance, I think you are probably right. Generally speaking, people like to cause the least overall disruption even if the outcome will be sub-optimal. I might be wrong, but I think in the case of stopping a thief or asking someone to be quiet on the train, there may be a fear of not being able to control the situation. So the disruption may escalate. For helping someone who is injured or comforting a lost child, there is less fear and people seem to act more quickly. Even as I write this, I'm not entirely sure of the distinction, though. It is strange :-)