6 ms·

Culture is one of the vitally important things which make us unique as humans. Both as an Australian and as a linguist it's painful to understand how quickly i

Culture is one of the vitally important things which make us unique as humans. Both as an Australian and as a linguist it's painful to understand how quickly indigenous culture here is being lost; my narrow and focused view is on language but the rate at which Aboriginal languages are dying at is absolutely alarming. Protecting culturally significant sites here is of vital importance both for historical reasons as well as to the lives of modern indigenous Australians.

hyperdunc 9y ago
Everything changes. All those indigenous languages are going to be lost in the sense they won't be actively used anymore - and that's not a bad thing. Even English will ultimately be lost, although it will likely be through the mechanisms of language evolution rather than first becoming moribund. Trying to preserving language and culture for its own sake is somewhat selfish, because it restricts individuals' experience. Better to take the good parts and incorporate them into daily life. The rest can remain in the tomes of history.
- shakna 9y ago
  > Better to take the good parts and incorporate them into daily life. The rest can remain in the tomes of history. You can't do that when the culture is lost because of the social upheavals that colonisation and the subsequent history. Preserving these things allow us to remember them, and improve today with them.
  - flukus 9y ago
    You think there's been none of that in 65000 years?
    - shakna 9y ago
      You're in a thread where we just discovered ancient tools that throws doubt on how long humans have been in an area. Those records are still being found.
- Ar-Curunir 9y ago
  Trying to preserve culture is good because it leaves choice in the hands of the individuals; they get to choose what parts to pick. It's incredibly easy to talk about "survival of the fittest" cultures from a Western point of view, but ask almost any other peoples that have had their culture irreparably damaged by colonial policies, and you'll find a different mindset.
  - hyperdunc 9y ago
    The individuals are doing that choosing when they choose not to preserve certain parts. They're going to abandon the parts in favor of alternatives that work better. The abandoned parts will no longer be passed down because they lack practical value - but they can be recorded. Trying to preserve a static and separate cultural identity is pointless when knowledge, technology and our environments are changing quickly. At best the efforts are well-meaning and harmless. At worst, they present as a fetish where post-colonial guilt tries to turn the West into a zoo of distinct cultures.
    - acdha 9y ago
      This is only true in the naive case where every decision is made in isolation, completely free of coercion. In the real world, this is coming after many decades of attempts to wipe out cultures, being overwhelmed by entertainment and other forms of pressure – want to guess the odds of an indigenous person successfully getting their music published, stories turned into movies, etc. prior to very recently? In most colonial countries attempts to convert people assimilate meant that schools prevented use of native languages and traditions, often even separating children from parents, leaving multi-generation gaps where people are truly learning those things for the first time at middle age from surviving elders. None of that is a neutral choice, and especially not one to make a historically irreversible decision. Choosing not to preserve something means it's gone forever even if people in the future disagree.
      - hyperdunc 9y ago
        My overall view is somewhat Darwinian, with selection based on merit rather than coercion. Overt oppression of other cultures is obviously to be opposed.

hyperdunc 9y ago

Everything changes. All those indigenous languages are going to be lost in the sense they won't be actively used anymore - and that's not a bad thing. Even English will ultimately be lost, although it will likely be through the mechanisms of language evolution rather than first becoming moribund. Trying to preserving language and culture for its own sake is somewhat selfish, because it restricts individuals' experience. Better to take the good parts and incorporate them into daily life. The rest can remain in the tomes of history.

shakna 9y ago
> Better to take the good parts and incorporate them into daily life. The rest can remain in the tomes of history. You can't do that when the culture is lost because of the social upheavals that colonisation and the subsequent history. Preserving these things allow us to remember them, and improve today with them.
- flukus 9y ago
  You think there's been none of that in 65000 years?
  - shakna 9y ago
    You're in a thread where we just discovered ancient tools that throws doubt on how long humans have been in an area. Those records are still being found.
Ar-Curunir 9y ago
Trying to preserve culture is good because it leaves choice in the hands of the individuals; they get to choose what parts to pick. It's incredibly easy to talk about "survival of the fittest" cultures from a Western point of view, but ask almost any other peoples that have had their culture irreparably damaged by colonial policies, and you'll find a different mindset.
- hyperdunc 9y ago
  The individuals are doing that choosing when they choose not to preserve certain parts. They're going to abandon the parts in favor of alternatives that work better. The abandoned parts will no longer be passed down because they lack practical value - but they can be recorded. Trying to preserve a static and separate cultural identity is pointless when knowledge, technology and our environments are changing quickly. At best the efforts are well-meaning and harmless. At worst, they present as a fetish where post-colonial guilt tries to turn the West into a zoo of distinct cultures.
  - acdha 9y ago
    This is only true in the naive case where every decision is made in isolation, completely free of coercion. In the real world, this is coming after many decades of attempts to wipe out cultures, being overwhelmed by entertainment and other forms of pressure – want to guess the odds of an indigenous person successfully getting their music published, stories turned into movies, etc. prior to very recently? In most colonial countries attempts to convert people assimilate meant that schools prevented use of native languages and traditions, often even separating children from parents, leaving multi-generation gaps where people are truly learning those things for the first time at middle age from surviving elders. None of that is a neutral choice, and especially not one to make a historically irreversible decision. Choosing not to preserve something means it's gone forever even if people in the future disagree.
    - hyperdunc 9y ago
      My overall view is somewhat Darwinian, with selection based on merit rather than coercion. Overt oppression of other cultures is obviously to be opposed.