nature of culture essay

Essays about Culture and Identity: 9 Examples And Prompts

Writing essays about culture and identity will help you explore your understanding of it. Here are examples that will give you inspiration for your next essay.

Culture can refer to customs, traditions, beliefs, lifestyles, laws, artistic expressions, and other elements that cultivate the collective identity. Different cultures are established across nations, regions, communities, and social groups. They are passed on from generation to generation while others evolve or are abolished to give way to modern beliefs and systems.

While our cultural identity begins at home, it changes as we involve ourselves with other groups (friends, educational institutions, social media communities, political groups, etc.) Culture is a very relatable subject as every person is part of a culture or at least can identify with one. Because it spans broad coverage, there are several interesting cultural subjects to write about.

Our culture and identity are dynamic. This is why you may find it challenging to write about it. To spark your inspiration, check out our picks of the best culture essays. 

1. Sweetness and Light by Matthew Arnolds

2. how auto-tune revolutionized the sound of popular music by simon reynolds, 3. how immigration changes language by john mcwhorter, 4. the comfort zone: growing up with charlie brown by jonathan franzen, 5. culture and identity definition by sandra graham, 6. how culture and surroundings influence identity by jeanette lucas, 7. how the food we eat reflects our culture and identity by sophia stephens, 8. identity and culture: my identity, culture, and identity by april casas, 9. how america hinders the cultural identity of their own citizens by seth luna, 1. answer the question, “who am i”, 2. causes of culture shock, 3. your thoughts on dystopia and utopia, 4. gender inequality from a global perspective, 5. the most interesting things you learned from other cultures, 6. the relationship between cultural identity and clothes, 7. describe your culture, 8. what is the importance of honoring your roots , 9. how can a person adapt to a new culture, 10. what artistic works best express your country’s culture, 11. how has social media influenced human interaction, 12. how do you protect the cultures of indigenous peoples, 13. are k-pop and k-drama sensations effectively promoting korea’s culture , 14. what is the importance of cultural diversity.

“… [A]nd when every man may say what he likes, our aspirations ought to be satisfied. But the aspirations of culture, which is the study of perfection, are not satisfied, unless what men say, when they may say what they like, is worth saying,—has good in it, and more good than bad.”

Arnolds compels a re-examination of values at a time when England is leading global industrialization and beginning to believe that greatness is founded on material progress. 

The author elaborates why culture, the strive for a standard of perfection, is not merely driven by scientific passions and, more so, by materialistic affluence. As he esteems religion as “that voice of the deepest human experience” to harmonize men in establishing that ideal society, Arnolds stresses that culture is the effort to “make reason and the will of God prevail” while humanizing gained knowledge to be society’s source of “sweetness and light.”

“Few innovations in sound production have been simultaneously so reviled and so revolutionary. Epoch-defining or epoch-defacing, Auto-Tune is indisputably the sound of the 21st century so far.”

Reynolds shows how Auto-Tune has shaped a pop music genre that has cut across cultures. The article maps out the music landscape Auto-Tune created and examines its impact on the culture of song productions and the modern taste for music. While the author debunks accusations that Auto-Tune destroyed the “natural” process of creating music, he also points out that the technology earned its reverence with big thanks to society’s current custom of using technology to hide blemishes and other imperfections.

Looking for more? Check out these essays about culture shock .

“… [T]he heavy immigration that countries like Italy are experiencing will almost certainly birth new kinds of Italian that are rich with slang, somewhat less elaborate than the standard, and… widely considered signs of linguistic deterioration, heralding a future where the “original” standard language no longer exists.”

American linguist McWhorter pacifies fears over the death of “standard” languages amid the wave of immigration to Europe. On the contrary, language is a vital expression of a culture, and for some, preserving is tantamount to upholding a cultural standard. 

However, instead of seeing the rise of new “multiethnolects” such as the Black English in America and Kiezdeutsch in Germany as threats to language and culture, McWhorter sees them as a new way to communicate and better understand the social groups that forayed these new languages.

“I wonder why “cartoonish” remains such a pejorative. It took me half my life to achieve seeing my parents as cartoons. And to become more perfectly a cartoon myself: what a victory that would be.”

This essay begins with a huge fight between Franzen’s brother and father to show how the cultural generation gap sweeping the 60s has hit closer to home. This generation gap, where young adults were rejecting the elders’ old ways in pursuit of a new and better culture, will also be the reason why his family ends up drifting apart. Throughout the essay, Franzen treads this difficult phase in his youth while narrating fondly how Peanuts, a pop culture icon at the time, was his source of escape. 

“…Culture is… your background… and Identity is formed where you belong to… Leopold Sedar Senghor and Shirley Geok-Lin Lim both talks about how culture and identity can impact… society…”

In this essay, Graham uses “To New York” by Senghor and “Learning To Love America” by Lim as two pieces of literature that effectively describe the role of culture and identity to traveling individuals. 

The author refers to Sengho’s reminder that people can adapt but must not forget their culture even if they go to a different place or country. On the other hand, Lim discusses immigrants’ struggle to have double identities.

“Culture is something that surrounds all of us and progress to shape our lives every day… Identity is illustrated as the state of mind in which someone or something distinguishes their own character traits that lead to determining who they really are, what they represent.”

Lucas is keen on giving examples of how his culture and surroundings influence an individual’s identity. She refers to Kothari’s “If you are what you eat, then what am I?” which discusses Kothari’s search for her identity depending on what food she eats. Food defines a person’s culture and identity, so Kothari believes that eating food from different countries will change his identity.

Lucas also refers to “Down These Mean Streets” by Piri Thomas, which argues how different cultural and environmental factors affect us. Because of what we encounter, there is a possibility that we will become someone who we are not. 

“What we grow is who we are. What we buy is who we are. What we eat is who we are.”

Stephens’ essay teaches its readers that the food we grow and eat defines us as a person. She explains that growing a crop and harvesting it takes a lot of effort, dedication, and patience, which mirrors our identity. 

Another metaphor she used is planting rice: it takes skills and knowledge to make it grow. Cooking rice is more accessible than cultivating it – you can quickly cook rice by boiling it in water. This reflects people rich in culture and tradition but who lives simpler life. 

“Every single one has their own unique identity and culture. Culture plays a big role in shaping your identity. Culture is what made me the person I am today and determines who or what I choose to associate myself with.”

Casas starts her piece by questioning who she is. In trying to learn and define who she is, she writes down and describes herself and her personality throughout the essay. Finally, she concludes that her culture is a big part of her identity, and she must understand it to understand herself.

“When it comes to these stereotypes we place on each other, a lot of the time, we succumb to the stereotypes given to us. And our cultural identity is shaped by these expectations and labels others give us. That is why negative stereotypes sometimes become true for a whole group or community.”

In this essay, Luna talks about how negative stereotyping in the United States led to moral distortion. For example, Americans are assumed to be ignorant of other countries’ cultures, making it difficult to understand other people’s cultures and lifestyles. 

She believes that stereotyping can significantly affect an individual or group’s identity. She suggests Americans should improve their intellectual competence by being sensitive to other people’s cultures.

14 Prompts on Essays about Culture and Identity

You can discuss many things on the subject of culture and identity. To give you a starting point, here are some prompts to help you write an exciting essay about culture. 

If you are interested in learning more, check out our essay writing tips and our round-up of the best essay checkers .

Understanding your personality is vital since continuous interaction with others can affect your personality. Write about your culture and identity; what is your personality? How do you define yourself? Everyone is unique, so by writing an essay about who you are, you’ll be able to understand why you act a certain way and connect with readers who have the same values. 

Here’s a guide on writing a descriptive essay to effectively relay your experience to your readers.

Sometimes, people need to get out of their comfort zone and interact with other individuals with different cultures, beliefs, or traditions. This is to broaden one’s perspective about the world. Aside from discussing what you’ve learned in that journey, you can also focus on the bits that shocked you. 

You can talk about a tradition or value that you found so bizarre because it differs from your culture. Then add how you processed it and finally adapted to it.

Dystopia and Utopia are both imagined worlds. Dystopia is a world where people live in the worst or most unfavorable conditions, while Utopia is the opposite. 

You can write an essay about what you think a Dystopian or Utopian world may look like, how these societies will affect their citizens, etc. Then, consider what personality citizens of each world may have to depend on the two worlds’ cultures.

Today, more and more people are fighting for others to accept or at least respect the LGBTQ+ community. However, countries, territories, and religions still question their rights.

In your essay, you can talk about why these institutions react the way they do and how culture dictates someone’s identity in the wrong way. Before creating your own, feel free to read other essays and articles to learn more about the global gender inequality issue. 

The world has diverse cultures, traditions, and values. When you travel to a new place, learning and writing about your firsthand experiences with unique cultures and rituals will always be an interesting read.

In this prompt, you’ll research other cultures and how they shaped their group’s identity. Then, write about the most exciting aspects you’ve learned, why you found them fascinating, and how they differ from your culture.

Those proud of their culture will wear clothes inspired by them. Some wear the same clothes even if they aren’t from the same culture. The debate over cultural appropriation and culture appreciation is still a hot topic. 

In this essay, you may start with the traditions of your community or observances your family celebrates and gathers for. Then, elaborate on their origins and describe how your community or family is preserving these practices. 

Learning about your roots, ancestors, and family cultures can help strengthen your understanding of your identity and foster respect for other cultures. Explore this topic and offer examples of what others have learned. Has the journey always been a positive experience? Delve into this question for an engaging and interesting essay.

When a person moves country, it can be challenging to adapt to a new culture. If there are new people at work or school, you can interview them and ask how they are coping with their new environment. How different is this from what they have been used to, and what unique traditions do they find interesting?

Focus on an art piece that is a source of pride and identity to your country’s culture, much like the Tinikling of the Philippines or the Matryoshka dolls of Russia. Explore its origins and evolution up to its current manifestation and highlight efforts that are striving to protect and promote these artistic works.

The older generation did not have computers in their teen years. Ask about how they dated in their younger years and how they made friends. Contrast how the younger generation is building their social networks today. Write what culture of socialization works better for you and explain why.

Take in-depth navigation of existing policies that protect indigenous peoples. Are they sufficient to serve these communities needs, and are they being implemented effectively? There is also the challenge of balancing the protection of these traditions against the need to protect the environment, as some indigenous practices add to the carbon footprint. How is your government dealing with this challenge?

A large population is now riding the Hallyu or the Korean pop culture, with many falling in love with the artists and Korea’s food, language, and traditional events. Research how certain Korean films, TV series, or music have effectively attracted fans to experience Korea’s culture. Write about what countries can learn from Korea in promoting their own cultures.

Environments that embrace cultural diversity are productive and innovative. To start your essay, assess how diverse your workplace or school is. Then, write your personal experiences where working with co-workers or classmates from different cultures led to new and innovative ideas and projects. Combine this with the personal experiences of your boss or the principal to see how your environment benefits from hosting a melting pot of cultures.

If you aim for your article to effectively change readers’ perspectives and align with your opinion, read our guide to achieving persuasive writing . 

Aisling is an Irish journalist and content creator with a BA in Journalism & New Media. She has bylines in OK! Magazine, Metro, The Inquistr, and the Irish Examiner. She loves to read horror and YA. Find Aisling on LinkedIn .

View all posts

Cultural Identity Essay

27 August, 2020

12 minutes read

Author:  Elizabeth Brown

No matter where you study, composing essays of any type and complexity is a critical component in any studying program. Most likely, you have already been assigned the task to write a cultural identity essay, which is an essay that has to do a lot with your personality and cultural background. In essence, writing a cultural identity essay is fundamental for providing the reader with an understanding of who you are and which outlook you have. This may include the topics of religion, traditions, ethnicity, race, and so on. So, what shall you do to compose a winning cultural identity essay?

Cultural Identity Paper: Definitions, Goals & Topics 

Before starting off with a cultural identity essay, it is fundamental to uncover what is particular about this type of paper. First and foremost, it will be rather logical to begin with giving a general and straightforward definition of a cultural identity essay. In essence, cultural identity essay implies outlining the role of the culture in defining your outlook, shaping your personality, points of view regarding a multitude of matters, and forming your qualities and beliefs. Given a simpler definition, a cultural identity essay requires you to write about how culture has influenced your personality and yourself in general. So in this kind of essay you as a narrator need to give an understanding of who you are, which strengths you have, and what your solid life position is.

Yet, the goal of a cultural identity essay is not strictly limited to describing who you are and merely outlining your biography. Instead, this type of essay pursues specific objectives, achieving which is a perfect indicator of how high-quality your essay is. Initially, the primary goal implies outlining your cultural focus and why it makes you peculiar. For instance, if you are a french adolescent living in Canada, you may describe what is so special about it: traditions of the community, beliefs, opinions, approaches. Basically, you may talk about the principles of the society as well as its beliefs that made you become the person you are today.

So far, cultural identity is a rather broad topic, so you will likely have a multitude of fascinating ideas for your paper. For instance, some of the most attention-grabbing topics for a personal cultural identity essay are:

• Memorable traditions of your community
• A cultural event that has influenced your personality 
• Influential people in your community
• Locations and places that tell a lot about your culture and identity

Cultural Identity Essay Structure

As you might have already guessed, composing an essay on cultural identity might turn out to be fascinating but somewhat challenging. Even though the spectrum of topics is rather broad, the question of how to create the most appropriate and appealing structure remains open.

Like any other kind of an academic essay, a cultural identity essay must compose of three parts: introduction, body, and concluding remarks. Let’s take a more detailed look at each of the components:

Introduction 

Starting to write an essay is most likely one of the most time-consuming and mind-challenging procedures. Therefore, you can postpone writing your introduction and approach it right after you finish body paragraphs. Nevertheless, you should think of a suitable topic as well as come up with an explicit thesis. At the beginning of the introduction section, give some hints regarding the matter you are going to discuss. You have to mention your thesis statement after you have briefly guided the reader through the topic. You can also think of indicating some vital information about yourself, which is, of course, relevant to the topic you selected.

Your main body should reveal your ideas and arguments. Most likely, it will consist of 3-5 paragraphs that are more or less equal in size. What you have to keep in mind to compose a sound ‘my cultural identity essay’ is the argumentation. In particular, always remember to reveal an argument and back it up with evidence in each body paragraph. And, of course, try to stick to the topic and make sure that you answer the overall question that you stated in your topic. Besides, always keep your thesis statement in mind: make sure that none of its components is left without your attention and argumentation.

Conclusion 

Finally, after you are all finished with body paragraphs and introduction, briefly summarize all the points in your final remarks section. Paraphrase what you have already revealed in the main body, and make sure you logically lead the reader to the overall argument. Indicate your cultural identity once again and draw a bottom line regarding how your culture has influenced your personality.

Best Tips For Writing Cultural Identity Essay

Writing a ‘cultural identity essay about myself’ might be somewhat challenging at first. However, you will no longer struggle if you take a couple of plain tips into consideration. Following the tips below will give you some sound and reasonable cultural identity essay ideas as well as make the writing process much more pleasant:

• Start off by creating an outline. The reason why most students struggle with creating a cultural identity essay lies behind a weak structure. The best way to organize your ideas and let them flow logically is to come up with a helpful outline. Having a reference to build on is incredibly useful, and it allows your essay to look polished.
• Remember to write about yourself. The task of a cultural identity essay implies not focusing on your culture per se, but to talk about how it shaped your personality. So, switch your focus to describing who you are and what your attitudes and positions are. 
• Think of the most fundamental cultural aspects. Needless to say, you first need to come up with a couple of ideas to be based upon in your paper. So, brainstorm all the possible ideas and try to decide which of them deserve the most attention. In essence, try to determine which of the aspects affected your personality the most.
• Edit and proofread before submitting your paper. Of course, the content and the coherence of your essay’s structure play a crucial role. But the grammatical correctness matters a lot too. Even if you are a native speaker, you may still make accidental errors in the text. To avoid the situation when unintentional mistakes spoil the impression from your essay, always double check your cultural identity essay. 

A life lesson in Romeo and Juliet taught by death

Due to human nature, we draw conclusions only when life gives us a lesson since the experience of others is not so effective and powerful. Therefore, when analyzing and sorting out common problems we face, we may trace a parallel with well-known book characters or real historical figures. Moreover, we often compare our situations with […]

Ethical Research Paper Topics

Writing a research paper on ethics is not an easy task, especially if you do not possess excellent writing skills and do not like to contemplate controversial questions. But an ethics course is obligatory in all higher education institutions, and students have to look for a way out and be creative. When you find an […]

Art Research Paper Topics

Students obtaining degrees in fine art and art & design programs most commonly need to write a paper on art topics. However, this subject is becoming more popular in educational institutions for expanding students’ horizons. Thus, both groups of receivers of education: those who are into arts and those who only get acquainted with art […]

The Nature of People and Culture Essay

This week focused on the second chapter of the textbook that discusses the nature of people and culture. The first key point is the understanding that culture is the framework of life and influences the aspects of life for every individual (De Melendez & Beck, 2018). Therefore, everything a person does, how they perceive things, their dress code, likes and dislikes, approach to social and political issues, and interaction with others is influenced by one’s culture. This understanding will improve how I view and relate to people at work and in social spaces because different cultures will create different life approaches and styles.

It is crucial to find an explanation for classroom behavior among learners. The second point from the text states that students’ manners, conduct, and reactions can be attributed to their culture (De Melendez & Beck, 2018). As such, acceptable acts by one learner may become unacceptable to another or to the teacher. Since children begin to learn their culture from birth, most of them will have the behaviors adopted from parents, older siblings, and other close relatives. This knowledge will help me to understand my students and plan the best experiences for every learner in the classroom.

Lastly, although culture belongs to society, there are differences between individuals in the same cultural groups. Such distinctions are seen in a classroom where each learner has a unique way of expressing themselves and reacting to various topics. Therefore, even people within the same family or community may exhibit varying behaviors and manners (De Melendez & Beck, 2018). Such differences originate from socialization and individual distinctions. After reading this chapter, while in the classroom, I will treat each student as unique and culturally different guarantee each of them receives the best attention and directions during the learning process.

De Melendez, W. R., & Beck, V. (2018). Teaching young children in multicultural classrooms: Issues, concepts, and strategies . Cengage Learning.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2022, December 31). The Nature of People and Culture. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-nature-of-people-and-culture/

"The Nature of People and Culture." IvyPanda , 31 Dec. 2022, ivypanda.com/essays/the-nature-of-people-and-culture/.

IvyPanda . (2022) 'The Nature of People and Culture'. 31 December.

IvyPanda . 2022. "The Nature of People and Culture." December 31, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-nature-of-people-and-culture/.

1. IvyPanda . "The Nature of People and Culture." December 31, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-nature-of-people-and-culture/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "The Nature of People and Culture." December 31, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-nature-of-people-and-culture/.

• Regional ‘Reacting to the Past’ Conference
• What Are the Benefits of Good Manners?
• “Reacting to the Past” Conference at Eastern Michigan University
• A Baby Reacting to Items
• Organizations Operate with Very Short Horizons, Reacting to an Ever-Changing Environment
• Cohabitation: Reacting or Responding?
• Children Relationships With Their Siblings
• Global Market: Where Does Your Meal Originate?
• Siblings’ direct and indirect contributions to Child
• The Problem of Textbooks Prices
• Defining Mexican Culture and Its Special Features
• Ethnocentrism and Cultural Relativism Differences
• Diversity, Inclusion, and Respect for Human Dignity in America
• Discussion of Cultural Blending Tendency
• Hawaiian Culture: Aesthetic Reflection

• Table of Contents
• Random Entry
• Chronological
• Editorial Information
• About the SEP
• Editorial Board
• How to Cite the SEP
• Special Characters
• Advanced Tools
• Support the SEP
• PDFs for SEP Friends
• Make a Donation
• SEPIA for Libraries
• Entry Contents

Bibliography

Academic tools.

• Friends PDF Preview
• Author and Citation Info
• Back to Top

Democratic societies are often characterized by extensive pluralism of religions, cultures, ethnicities, and worldviews, on the basis of which citizens make claims against their state. Democratic states are additionally characterized by a commitment to treat all citizens equally, and so they require fair and just ways to wade through and respond to these claims. This entry considers cultural claims in particular.

Cultural claims are ubiquitous in political and legal spaces. Not only do individuals and groups both make cultural claims against the state, often for legal or political accommodations, but the state often explains its choices in terms of protecting particular aspects of its culture. This entry will first examine the ways in which “culture” is defined by political and moral philosophers: culture-as-encompassing group, culture-as-social-formation, culture-as-narrative/dialogue, and culture-as-identity. Over the course of this discussion, the “essentialist” challenge will be introduced: an essentialist account of culture is one that treats certain key characteristics of that culture as defining it and correspondingly all of its members must share certain key traits in order to be treated as members (for more, see Phillips 2010). In particular, the entry goes on to note that early conceptions of culture-as-encompassing groups are criticized for being essentialist, and later conceptions are attempts to reformulate culture in ways that avoid the essentialist challenge.

Following an articulation of these main ways of understanding culture, the entry turns to an assessment of distinct (though occasionally overlapping) types of cultural claims that are pressed against the state by minority groups: exemption claims, assistance claims, self-determination claims, recognition claims, preservation claims (and claims against coerced cultural loss), defensive claims in legal settings, and exclusive use claims (claims against cultural appropriation). There are both justifications for, and objections to, these claims, and they often hinge on how “culture” is understood. In many cases, the disputes about the justifiability of these claims hinge on competing understandings of what culture is, and especially, how valuable it is to those who are members, as will be shown below. Finally, the entry will close with an assessment of cases where a majority community makes cultural claims to justify actions, mainly in the context of controlling immigration and, in some cases, refusing entry to potential migrants all together, as well as the cultural demands it makes of those who are admitted, and the range of justifications and objections offered in these cases. This section considers the content of the majority culture, to which newcomers are asked to adhere, as well as how forcibly they can be “asked” to do so.

1.1 Culture-as-encompassing-group

1.2 culture-as-social-formation, 1.3 culture-as-dialogue, 1.4 culture-as-identity (or identity rather than culture), 2.1 exemption rights, 2.2 assistance rights, 2.3 self-determination rights, 2.4 recognition rights, 2.5 cultural preservation rights, 2.6 rights against cultural loss, 2.7 cultural defense rights, 2.8 exclusive cultural use rights (or rights against cultural appropriation), 3.1 cultural continuity and exclusion rights, 3.2 cultural continuity and integration enforcement rights, 4. conclusion, other internet resources, related entries, 1. defining culture.

Defining the term “culture” is very challenging: it has been described as both a “notoriously overbroad concept” (Song 2009: 177) and a “notoriously ambiguous concept” (Eisenberg 2009: 7). It is deployed in multiple ways: as the entry will go on to consider in more length, the term “culture” can refer to the set of norms, practices and values that characterize minority and majority groups, for example by noting that the Hasidic Jewish communities in New York practice a unique “culture”, or by describing Italian or Senegalese culture. But it is also used in other ways, for example, to refer to “bro” culture or “hipster” culture, or the culture of British football fans. Moreover, any one person can be a member of multiple cultures—someone (like this writer!) can be a member of the Canadian culture, the Ottawan culture, the Jewish culture, and the academic culture at the same time. Contextual considerations will explain why the norms, practices, and values that define each of these cultures become relevant at a particular moment. Moreover, only some of these cultures have political and legal relevance; only those that do are the focus of this entry.

In the political and legal spheres, there is widespread disagreement about what culture is , and the next section is focused on elaborating these distinct views of culture. There is however considerable agreement that whatever it is, it matters to people and the meaning and value it provides to the lives of individuals are among the most important reasons, if not the most important ones, to defend and protect it in legal and political spaces. This value is why it is important to attempt to discover what culture is and correspondingly why, and which aspects of it in particular, should or should not be protected in the public sphere. Notice that the observation that cultures are valuable to people, and indeed that they bring value to the lives of individuals, is not the same as saying that individual cultural practices are all good. Any defensible account of culture must take seriously the importance of culture in general without defending all of its instantiations. There are four main ways in which culture has been interpreted: as an encompassing group, as social formation, in dialogic terms, and in identity terms.

One way to think about culture is as a kind of all-encompassing whole, which shapes all or most dimensions of our lives. It is perhaps Will Kymlicka’s formulation of a “societal culture” that is most responsible for generating serious reflection on the nature of culture understood in this way. A societal culture

provides its members with meaningful ways of life across the full range of human activities, including social, educational, religious, recreational and economic life, encompassing both public and private spheres. (Kymlicka 1996: 76)

Kymlicka explains that a vibrant societal culture provides a “context for choice”, i.e., it provides the resources that individuals rely on to make sense of their world and the choices it offers. On this account, nation-states are well-described as having a societal culture, as are Indigenous groups and sub-state national minority groups (for example, the Catalans or the Tibetans); immigrant groups which sustain a range of cultural practices and norms even as they integrate into a larger “societal culture” are not.

Kymlicka is not alone in offering an encompassing account of culture. Michael Walzer too offers such an account, proposing that we understand political communities as “communities of character”, in which members are bound by a “world of common meanings” (Walzer 1983: 28). Avishai Margalit and Joseph Raz also describe so-called “encompassing” groups, in which their members

find in them a culture which shapes to a large degree their tastes and opportunities, and which provides an anchor for their self-identification and the safety of effortless secure belonging. (Margalit & Raz 1990: 448)

Avishai Margalit and Moshe Halbertal say of an encompassing group that its culture “covers various important aspects of life”, and in so saying, they offer as an example the Ultra-Orthodox Jewish culture:

it defines people’s activities (such as Torah study in Ultra-Orthodox culture), determines occupation (such as circumciser), and defines important relationships (such as marriage). It affects everything people do: cooking, architectural style, common language, literary and artistic traditions, music, customs, dress, festivals, ceremonies…the culture influences its members’ taste, the types of options they have and the meaning of these options, and the characteristics they consider significant in their evaluation of themselves and others. (Margalit & Halbertal 1994: 498)

Whereas Kymlicka emphasizes the freedom that is offered by a robust societal culture, Margalit and Halbertal speak of its role in securing members’ “personality identity” (Margalit & Halbertal 1994: 502) and Walzer of its importance in shaping a “collective consciousness”. Although these scholars justify the protection of a robust culture for many reasons, they agree that what culture does, fundamentally, is offer a background value system that helps members select among options and interpret their value, including for example with respect to certain forms of employment, or education, or family structure and child-rearing. Walzer captures the way in which culture informs how even the most basic of things are understood:

a single necessary good, and one that is always necessary—food, for example—carries different meanings in different places. Bread is the staff of life, the body of Christ, the symbol of the Sabbath, the means of hospitality, and so on. (Walzer 1983: 8)

Much is illuminated by these accounts of culture, including especially why depleted societal cultures may be less able to provide the context for choice that Kymlicka emphasizes, or why one’s “personality identity” may thereby be threatened: if a cultural group’s educational, political, or economic systems are weakened, their capacity to support members to make sense of the world, and choose among options, is likewise weakened. Moreover, this account illustrates the wrong of undermining the cultures of others: if a culture is undermined, the choices available to its members are thereby reduced. We can see this with respect to Indigenous culture in many states: where states have actively attempted to erase Indigenous culture, the result has been severe social dislocation and alienation among Indigenous peoples whose context for choice has been substantially weakened.

However, multiple objections have been launched at this way of understanding culture, most of which are variants on what is termed the “essentialist” objection; notice, though, that the views described above are not believed by their holders to be essentialist. The essentialist objection targets what it sees as an assumption that members of a culture will hold the same set of practices, norms, and values to be important, and in the same measure. But, say critics, this assumption does not hold: in any actual culture, members will be differently committed to its defining practices and norms, and indeed, there will necessarily be disagreement around which of its practices and norms are defining in the first place. The essentialist objection says, roughly, that treating culture as encompassing wrongly does one of the following things: 1) it proclaims that certain features of a culture are at its core and therefore immutable, on pain of dissolving the culture (Eisenberg 2009: 120), and correspondingly that cultures are necessarily bounded and determinate rather than contested and fluid (Moore 2019; Patten 2014: 38); 2) having identified these features as at a culture’s core, it excludes those who believe themselves to be members but do not  conform to, display, or respect these features (Parvin 2008: 318–19); and, 3) it ignores the reality that most people in a liberal society “draw their identity from a multiplicity of roles and communities and memberships at any one time” (Parvin 2008: 321), which can variously have social salience, depending on the context, both independently of, and sometimes in conjunction with, cultural identities (Moore 2019). In summary, a too-encompassing account of what culture is for its members runs the risk of treating the boundaries of a culture as if they are determinate, unshifting, and as though its members display no variance (and perhaps cannot display variance) in their commitment to the culture as a whole and its defining practices.

The alternative accounts of culture that are considered below are all, at least in part, intended to respond to the essentialist challenge; their objective is, in other words, to generate a plausible account of what culture is , and correspondingly what it means to be a member of a particular cultural group, that can be deployed to make sense of legal and political controversies, and ideally adjudicate among them, without succumbing to the essentialist challenge. A caveat: the views of culture treated below should be understood as “ideal types”, characterized so as to understand its key features, how it is differentiated from other views, and why it does not fall victim (in its own estimation) to the essentialist challenge.

One attempt to reconceive culture in a way that responds to the essentialist challenge, but which retains a view of culture as largely encompassing, proposes that cultures are defined by their members’ shared experience of social formation (Patten 2014: 39). On this “social lineage” account of culture, what makes a culture is that its members are subject to a “set of formative conditions that are distinct from the formative conditions that are imposed on others” (Patten 2014: 51). The experience of being subjected to common institutions, understood broadly to include shared educational spaces, languages, media, as well as shared historical traditions and stories, overlapping familial structures, and so on, shapes a sense among cultural group members that they share a distinct way of seeing the world, and that certain assumptions that they possess are shared by, or at least understood by, others. This view emphasizes a culture’s historical trajectory, but does not require that its defining norms, values and practices are unchanging over time. On the contrary,

internal variation is possible because subjection to a common set of formative influences does not imply that people will end up with a homogeneous set of beliefs or values. (Patten 2014: 52)

As a result, cultures are sites in which members can contest and deliberate their meaning with enough shared assumptions about the way the world works that they can recognize each other as engaged in the same project.

Patten writes of the institutions to which cultural group members are subject that they are at least to some degree “isolated from the institutions and practices that work to socialize outsiders” (Patten 2014: 52), and thus serve to distinguish one culture from another. On this view, significant emphasis is placed on who is controlling the levers of the institutions that shape members’ formation: that is, it matters that members are in control of the institutions to which they, themselves, are subject, so that they can plausibly shape their own social experience, and the experience of younger members, in fundamental ways. Where the control over this social formation is denied, a culture’s members are thereby harmed; when it is coercively denied, there is very likely an injustice demanding remedy.

By focusing on the shared experience of subjection to common cultural institutions, this account avoids the accusation that what defines a culture is the stability of its basic norms and values over time: culture is not, on this view, a static entity. Instead, what matters is that cultural group members believe themselves to be members of a cultural group, and that this belief’s foundation is in the experience of common cultural institutions, rather than in the specific practices that are central to the group. These central practices can change fundamentally, without the cultural group itself dissolving. However, this view is subject to criticism by scholars who worry that those who control the levers of formation do not represent the views of all members (Phillips 2018), that instead they are using their relative positions of power to create and enforce cultural norms and practices that do not command (or would not command, without coercion) widespread agreement.

The latter objection—that a so-called culture is the product of some but not all of its members leads some scholars to rearticulate culture in terms of the ways in which it is constructed via dialogue among members and their engagement with each other. The purpose of emphasizing that a culture’s members are the source of its main practices, values and norms, is to emphasize that a culture is not “given” to its members from above, as a fixed and unalterable entity. Rather, members of a culture are, in a fundamental way, its authors. Here is James Tully explaining this: cultures are

continuously contested, imagined and reimagined, transformed and negotiated, both by their members and through their interactions with others. (Tully 1995: 11)

Seyla Benhabib similarly emphasizes the narrative aspect of cultures, noting that insiders

experience their traditions, stories, rituals and symbols, tools, and material living conditions through shared, albeit contested and contestable, narrative accounts. (Benhabib 2002: 5)

That there is contestation among members, and that its main elements are under constant negotiation, does not render a culture any less meaningful for its members. What may seem confusing is the idea that a contestable and constantly shifting culture warrants protection; perhaps protection means artificially halting the natural changes that a culture would undergo, by protecting elements of it at a moment in time. But defenders of this view demand protection in the form of ensuring that the forums in which culture is negotiated, shared and transmitted, are sustained in robust and inclusive ways, and without unwanted interference by forces external to the culture. As with the culture-as-formation account, the emphasis is on the capacity of group members to shape the norms and practices that are central, rather than with the norms and practices themselves.

How does this view respond to the worry about asymmetrical power distribution within a cultural group? Focusing on the ways in which a culture’s central characteristics are determined via negotiation among members is an attempt to be attentive to the power structures that shape whose voice is heard during these negotiations, in minority and majority cultures (Dhamoon 2006). In many, and indeed perhaps in most, cultures, historically the dominant voices have been male, and one impact of that has generally been a gendered view of the how best to organize cultural life, that has reduced the rights of women (and other minorities) in myriad ways, often to their disadvantage as well as against their will. For some, the oppression of less powerful members by those who hold the levers of power generates at least partial skepticism about the value of protecting or accommodating culture in liberal, democratic states, especially in cases where it may seem that “multiculturalism is bad for women” (Okin 1999). On this view, cultural practices that undermine the rights of women (and other minorities) should not be tolerated in liberal democratic states.

The recognition that many cultural practices are disadvantageous to women (and other minorities) does not propel all political theorists to adopt a skeptical attitude towards them in all cases. For some, it is an opportunity to see that cultures can be valued even by those who are putatively oppressed, even as they work from the inside to influence the direction of their culture, towards less oppressive norms and practices. For example, although often sidelined from their centres of power, many women value their cultures in ways that press them not to exit, but rather to engage in processes of reforming inegalitarian practices and norms, from within (Deveaux 2007). This way of thinking about culture and its contents celebrates, and encourages, moves to “democratize” the mechanisms by which a cultural group’s main norms, values and practices are adopted, and defends public cultures that are genuinely open to multiple voices (Lenard 2012).

This narrative or dialogic account of culture thus responds well to the essentialist challenge, by denying that the defining features of a culture must be static and equally valuable to all members of a cultural group. But, it must respond to another challenge, namely, the individuation challenge (Moore 2019). If an account of culture is going to be robust enough to define the entities that should be entitled to additional political and legal consideration in various ways, including with respect to additional rights protections or exemptions from certain legal and political requirements, it must also be able to identify with some specificity the boundaries of a particular, discrete, culture and who legitimately counts as a member for the purposes of respecting the political and legal claims made as a result. But this can be a challenge to accomplish.

To see why, consider Benhabib’s account of the ways in which cultures are observed from the outside, and the way they are experienced from the inside. The observer is largely responsible, she says, for imposing “unity and coherence on cultures”, whereas from the inside, its participants

One effect of understanding the culture in this way is that while many of its members will hold deeply to the central values and take deep satisfaction in participating in the central cultural traditions, many others will dip in and out of its central practices, and pick and choose among its central values and norms. So, just who counts as a member is blurry, and this blurriness may appear to be a problem when membership is said to confer rights and privileges that are not available to non-members. There is an inevitable tension between the need to individuate cultures for political reasons and the boundaries of cultures which are inevitably poorly demarcated. Only context will enable us to resolve the political questions that will thereby emerge.

To answer the challenge of how to identify a culture, and its members, one proposal focuses on the subjective component associated with belonging to a cultural group. Take this example, described by Margaret Moore: although there is deep division in Northern Ireland between Catholics and Protestants, the differences are neither religious (the conflict is not about distinctive interpretations of a religious text, and religious figures are not targeted for violence), nor cultural, since surveys of cultural values of both communities reveal considerable overlap among the values that competing communities hold (Moore 1999: 35). She says, rather, a focus on shared identities among rival groups makes more sense of the conflict.  A largely or partly identity-focused view highlights that one key dimension of culture is the way in which it shapes the identity of cultural group members. As well, such a view highlights that culture is a thing to which many people will have important connections, but which will be defining for them in multiple and distinct ways. An identity-focused view has clear merits: for example, it can explain why individuals remain nominally attached to a culture, even though its centrally defining features shift historically over time, and even if they do not engage with some of its more traditional aspects.

Additionally, an identity-focused view can accommodate identities that are not obviously culturally based, for example, including LGBTQ+ identities (Eisenberg 2009: 20; for a discussion of cultural/identity claims in an LGBTQ+ context, see Ghosh 2018: chapter 4). Indeed, an identity-focused view aims to circumvent the difficulty of identifying what specific material is legitimately cultural material. As noted above, scholars of minority cultures frequently note that there is a wide variety of claims made by a wide variety of groups, and these groups are defined by an assortment of distinct characteristics, including race, ethnicity, religion and sexuality. Say its defenders, a focus on identity rather than culture may be preferable because

the term identity covers more ground in the sense that it can refer to religious, linguistic, gendered, Indigenous and other dimensions of self-understanding. (Eisenberg 2009: 2)

2. Minority Cultural Rights Claims

The four views of culture described above inform the cultural claims that both individuals and groups make against the state. The specific threats that individuals and groups face, and which demand a kind of protection, are distinct, as are the responses that states may have in response to the claims made by individuals and groups (Eisenberg 2009: 20–21). In some cases, claims are made for accommodations for all members of a group qua group; in others, claims are made with respect to particular individuals; and there may well be connection among these. For example, a group may demand language protection policies, or an individual may claim a right to speak her mother tongue in legal proceedings. These rights are related to each other, and may be in some cases derived from one another: one reason an individual has a right to speak her mother tongue in legal proceedings may be because the state has recognized her language as an official language either of the state, or of a sub-state jurisdiction, for example. As a matter of accommodation , it will be important in what follows to notice when claims are made for accommodations that apply to individuals and when they are accommodations that apply to groups; although some philosophers are keen to assess whether cultural rights are best understood as individual or group rights (Casals 2006), the analysis below proceeds by assuming that they can be both (following Levy 2000: 125).

Notice as well that the term “accommodation” is a kind of catch-all to include the wide range of claims an individual or group can make against a state on the basis of culture. Political philosophers have attempted to distinguish among these claims in myriad ways, in order to make sense of them. Many such rights are claimed by immigrant groups (typically) to a state, who require certain accommodations from the state in order to better integrate into that state. In the larger debate around the value of multiculturalism, there is considerable discussion about which sorts of accommodations encourage the integration of, especially, culturally distinct newcomers, and which sorts permit or even encourage their separation from the larger society (e.g., Sniderman & Hagendoorn 2007). Some scholars worry, as well, that a focus on how best to accommodate cultural minority groups travels with ignoring (perhaps wilfully) more important questions of redistribution to those who are less well off (Barry 2001; Fraser 1995). In general, however, multicultural theorists agree that accommodation rights are most defensible when they support the integration of minorities in general, and newcomers in particular, as well as when they are aimed at remedying persistent inequalities between majority and minority groups.

It is worth noting that not everyone readily agrees that “culture” should be treated as a source of distinct legal and political claims, however. For example, Sarah Song points out that so-called “multicultural” claims are often in fact claims to accommodate a wide range of groups, including racial, religious and ethnic groups. Many political theorists of cultural rights appear to believe that there are distinct and recognizable cultural groups, making distinctive cultural claims, whereas in their example-giving they rely on a “wide range of examples involving religion, language, ethnicity, nationality, and race” (Song 2009: 177). Rarely is “culture” alone the basis for a claim against a state. Rather, says Song, so-called cultural claims are in fact often demands for other well-understood and defensible democratic goods. Most such demands are for religious accommodations, well-defended by standard liberal defenses of freedom of conscience; others are demands for reparations for past and ongoing wrong, in the form of affirmative action; others yet are demands for democratic inclusion, often rooted in a morally problematic history of deliberate exclusion. Once the reasons for these “cultural” demands are revealed clearly, we will often find democratically defensible reasons to respect and accommodate them, without needing to resort to relying on culture as a distinct entity, giving rise to a distinct set of rights-claims. The result is that the controversy associated with properly defining cultures and identifying their members can be avoided in many instances. However, this analysis can make it difficult to treat cases where something called “culture” interacts with, or supplements, religious, ethnic, and racial claims.

Take the case of the choice, made by referendum, to ban minarets on mosques in Switzerland. The defensibility of the ban has been the subject of deliberation among political philosophers, and one key point of contention has been whether and to what extent minarets are religiously required by Islam. Many interpreters propose that, since minarets are not obligatory according to Islamic religious requirements, the choice to ban them is regrettable (because of what it says about the public place of Islam in Switzerland), but it does not violate the religious freedom of practising Muslims in Switzerland, and as a result is permissible (Miller 2016). In making this claim, however, what is ignored is the cultural significance of minarets. Without a recognition of the distinct place of culture in certain claims, a full understanding of the minaret case cannot be reached. The same challenge can be seen in deliberations around whether Muslim women should be permitted to wear face coverings in public spaces. Some commentators suggest that, because (according to some interpretations) Islamic texts do not appear to require face coverings, women can be denied the right to engage in this practice, without violating their religious freedom. In making this argument, its defenders notice that the choice to cover faces is in effect a (mere) cultural interpretation of Islamic requirements, as evidenced by the fact that only some communities of practising Muslims engage in the practice. For some scholars, it is essential to separate religious from cultural claims—liberal democratic states take religious claims very seriously as matters of conscience, and have a long history of zealously protecting religious freedom. So, having determined that a claim is not one of religious freedom, such scholars believe they can comfortably deny the request for permission to cover faces in public spaces. However, ignoring the cultural dimensions of the claim—or treating them as though they are obviously of less significance than the underlying religious claim—fails to treat the case properly. In particular, it fails to take seriously that religious obligations necessarily have cultural interpretations, that a full recognition of religious freedom entails recognizing their cultural interpretations, and that specifically cultural legal and political accommodation (of a religious commitment) will thereby be called for.

In what follows, distinct types of cultural claims, made against a state’s major institutions, will be examined. These claims are, as will be seen, sometimes made by individuals and sometimes by groups. Where relevant, the analysis will highlight whether the concept of culture that is being deployed is culture-as-encompassing group, culture-as-social-formation, culture-as-narrative, or culture-as-identity. The analysis will not always be neat. In some cases, there will be multiple defenses of a cultural right, which rely on distinct understandings of culture.

Perhaps the most familiar type of cultural claim made against the state is in the form of request for exemptions from rules and regulations that typically apply to all citizens. Exemption rights respond to the fact that, in liberal democracies, laws and practices are meant—genuinely—to treat all citizens equally, but that there are some which inadvertently impose disadvantage on certain minorities. The worry to be resolved is that minority citizens are unintentionally or accidentally burdened by the normal application of certain laws (Levy 2000: 130), in ways that treat them unfairly, which can be resolved by exemptions from certain laws and normal practices (Quong 2006; Gutmann 2003). The extension of exemption rights then is understood as a

a recognition of that difference, as an attempt not to unduly burden the minority culture or religion en route to the laws’ legitimate goals. (Levy 2000: 130)

For example, some Sikhs request exemption from laws that require wearing motorcycle or construction-site helmets. Although Sikhism is a religion, Sikhs describe the requirement that they wear a turban not quite as a religious requirement, but rather as a symbol of their faith and commitment to Sikh values, as well as an expression of their identity (Sikh Faith FAQs in Other Internet Resources ). Without exemption from these laws, Sikhs would be excluded from taking advantage of opportunities that are meant to be available to all citizens on an equal basis. The same is true of Indigenous communities, who have requested exemptions from generally applicable laws that limit hunting and fishing, explaining that such limits undermine their traditional way of life, or make it hard (or impossible) for them to sustain themselves (Levy 2000: 128). Before Sunday-closing laws were abandoned in Canada and the United States, religious minorities were occasionally granted exemptions from them. In these cases, as described above and without legally provided exemptions, people (usually minorities) must choose between participating in opportunities that should be available to all citizens on an equal basis or to respect their (cultural) understanding of what their religion requires of them.

The request for exemption can be lightly distinguished from the request for rule modification. As indicated, exemption requests are, as they sound, requests that individuals be exempted from certain requirements that are meant to apply to all citizens equally; modification requests ask for changes in existing, majority, practices to accommodate certain other, minority, practices. Sikhs sometimes request exemption from laws that would, otherwise, require them to remove their turban as above; in other cases, they request uniform modifications, so that turbans are treated as one among several available head coverings for those carrying out a specific role. The same is true of uniform modification requests made by Muslim women who cover their faces or heads, and Jewish men who wear yarmulkes, where uniforms have traditionally required an uncovered head or face, or where they have required particular head coverings (as in the Sikh case, they may also be presented as requests for exemptions). Similarly, when observant Muslims request short breaks in their work day to pray at specific times of day, or when Jewish and Muslim students ask for changes in the provision of foods (to accommodate kosher and halal obligations) in school cafeterias, the request is for modification rather than exemption.

In most cases, the early failure of a legitimate law to modify or exempt new practices is unintentional. That is, the laws or practices in place were not adopted intentionally with the purpose of excluding, but were rather adopted under the assumption that they treat the existing population fairly. But widespread immigration has diversified many populations in substantial ways. Immigrants often travel with practices and norms that are, when they arrive, unfamiliar to the states they are joining, and as a result states are asked to modify certain laws, and exempt newcomers from certain others. There may be cases where there are legitimate public reasons to persist in applying certain laws in spite of the disadvantage they generate for newcomers. As well, there are cases where states persist in demanding obedience to laws and practices that clearly disadvantage newcomers attempting to integrate, but where there are no good mitigating factors to justify persisting in the imposing of disadvantage (as when the Danish town of Randers passed a law requiring that pork be served “on an equal footing with other foods” in school cafeterias). In these latter cases, the exclusionary impact of the laws is no longer inadvertent, and they are generally condemnable for perpetuating unnecessary and unjustified exclusion from political, economic and social spaces.

It is not always the case that individuals or groups claiming cultural rights to exemption and modification are immigrants, but that is often the case. Indigenous communities ask for exemptions, as do certain orthodox religious communities. These cases will be discussed below in the section focused on cultural preservation.

Demands for assistance call on the state to preserve the conditions under which various elements of a culture can persist and even thrive, especially minority languages, or to promote and protect cultural associations in various ways, including by offering financial support to artists from within these cultural groups, or by providing resources to permit the production and distribution of ethnic-language media. The justification for assistance rights is the same as for exemption and modification requests: it is to prevent persistent unfairness in access to rights or goods that are meant to be available for all citizens on an equal basis. In the case of assistance rights, cultural minority groups argue that the majority group has access to these goods already, for example to a robust language or media space, and so they request state resources to secure these goods for cultural minorities as well. Here, whereas the justification overlaps with the one offered to defend exemption and modification rights—to generate fairness—the understanding of culture that underpins the demand for these rights is distinct. Typically, exemption and modification claims treat culture-as-identity or dialogue, whereas in the case of assistance claims, the background understanding of culture is often culture-as-social-formation or culture-as-encompassing group; the culture is treated as a whole that requires assistance to protect each of its central parts, in order to do the job of shaping members well.

Self-determination rights are those that confer substantial control to sub-state jurisdictions over a particular territory and in particular the right to run the major institutions on that territory. A self-determining community is one that, because of control over major institutions in a territory, is capable of making and enforcing decisions, without interference by outsiders, in multiple policy spaces (I. M. Young 2004). The justification for self-determination rights is sometimes based on reparation or corrective justice, for example where past state actions have undermined the capacity for a particular cultural group to be self-determining in the first place (Song 2009: 184). In other cases, the demand for self-determination is justified with respect to the importance of protecting the autonomy of a culturally distinct sub-state jurisdiction, that is, its capacity to run its own affairs in ways that are consonant with its particular cultural preferences. The right to self-determination typically relies on an understanding of culture-as-encompassing group, or culture-as-social-formation, suggesting that without significant control over the major institutions that govern the lives of citizens, the relevant group will not be able to be self-determining.

The right to self-determination is typically attributed to states, so its meaning in the context of minority communities operating at the sub-state level is not always clear. Among sub-state jurisdictions, the right is often claimed by Indigenous groups as well as sub-state national groups, like the Basques and the Scottish, whose “societal culture” is manifestly distinct from the majority’s societal culture. The demand for self-determination is a demand to make choices about how children are educated, what language is spoken by the relevant political authorities, and how the public space should be organized. The right claimed has at least three manifestations: 1) the right, at a minimum, to “maintain a comprehensive way of life within the larger society without interference”; 2) the right to recognition by the majority for its way of life, and 3) the right to active backing by the majority to affirmatively support the relevant way of life so that “the culture can flourish” (Margalit & Halbertal 1994: 498). These three interpretations make distinct demands on the state, running from simple non-interference to active participation in sustaining the conditions for self-determination. As a result, the larger state is sometimes tasked with assessing the extent to which it wants to direct its resources to supporting a particular request for self-determination, focused on whether associated claims to cultural preservation are warranted. These will be considered below.

The demand for formal recognition in legal and political documents often travels with the demand for self-determination, and is grounded in a desire to have the majority mark its commitment to the full and equal respect of a cultural minority group (Mcbride 2009). In the Canadian case, the Québécois have long fought for recognition as a nation, with a “distinct society”. Attempts to recognize Québec’s status in the Canadian constitution have repeatedly failed, though a motion that read “That this House recognize that the Québécois form a nation within a united Canada” was approved (with considerable controversy, however) by the House of Commons in 2006. The demand for recognition in this case is a demand for respect as an equal, national, founding partner of the Canadian state.

In the case of Indigenous communities as well, the right to self-determination often includes not only the demand to exercise authority over specific jurisdictions, but also for recognition. They seek recognition, for example, as original inhabitants of a particular state, or as nations in their own right, or as having been the victims of various crimes at the hands of colonizers, including the violation of early treaties between them, as well as demands for state support in sustaining and, in many cases, rebuilding communities that were actively devastated by colonizing/settler governments. In Canada, and other colonizing states, for example, it has become common to read land acknowledgement statements in advance of events (including as part of the “announcements” read at the beginning of a school day), recognizing that events and proceedings are taking place on unceded Indigenous land. Similarly, Australian Indigenous communities have long argued for official recognition in the Australian constitution. From the perspective of Australian Indigenous communities, the hope, and indeed the expectation, is that official recognition will give rise to additional rights and benefits, for example to greater voice and political access to members of the minority. The hope for additional rights and benefits is present in some, but not all, cases of recognition claims (for example, it largely was not present in the case of Québec).

Recognition comes in other forms beyond acknowledgement in legal and political documents, that are intended to confirm respect for minority groups. In some states, the languages of minority groups can be officially recognized as national languages. For example, the Romansh language in Switzerland is officially recognized as a national language, even though its speakers make up less than 1% of the country’s total population. By contrast, Turkish laws that banned the speaking of Kurdish in public spaces were an attempt to deny recognition to a national minority (lifted finally in 1991). As with demands for official recognition in binding constitutional documents, these sorts of recognition demonstrate respect for minority communities as well as a commitment to treating them as full and equal members of the larger state.

Cultural preservation rights are those that groups claim as key to sustaining a cultural group as a cultural group. This right is sometimes described as a right to the “survival of a culturally-specific people” (Gutmann 2003: 75). In some cases, the justification is based on the claim that certain forms of exposure to and engagement with the wider community will result in the erosion of a culture that is valued by its members. In others, the justification is historical, as in where orthodox religious groups, fleeing religious persecution in Europe, agreed to settle new land in Canada and the United States in exchange for religious freedom. In others, the central justification is that cultural diversity is valuable and worth preserving, in and of itself (Parekh 2000). (In some cases, cultural preservation rights are claimed as recompense for past wrong; this claim is considered separately, below.) Demands for cultural preservation are most controversial where they are made by illiberal groups, as will be detailed shortly.

It is worth dwelling here for a moment to notice that there are two ways to interpret cultural preservation: it could mean the preservation of a group as a distinct cultural entity or it could mean the preservation of certain practices and values that are believed, at a moment in time, to be central to the culture. Rights to cultural preservation come in multiple formats, including demands for exemption, parental autonomy, respect for internal conflict resolution mechanisms (in family law, mainly), and control over membership. These rights are justified with respect to preserving culture, and typically rely on an understanding of culture-as-encompassing groups or culture-as-social-formation, just as does the more general right to self-determination with which they often travel.

Many minority illiberal groups ask only for rights of forbearance against the state in which they live (Spinner-Halev 2000). In response, a state may permit an illiberal cultural group to be “left alone”, on the idea that so long as it can persist without state support of any kind, it may do so. A state may be asked to do more, however, to preserve the culture.

For example, a state may be asked to exempt community members from certain requirements that are typically demanded of all citizens, including mandatory schooling and child labour laws. Consider this example: many orthodox Amish communities live a life that is largely segregated from the wider community. They live a religiously structured way of life which dictates whom members marry, how they raise children, how they produce an economy that permits their way of life to continue. In most cases, they demand neither recognition nor additional financial support in order to protect their communities’ way of life. They had previously demanded only non-interference, for the most part. But, in the 1970s, some American Amish communities demanded, and were granted, the right to withdraw their children from mandatory education at the age of 14, arguing that where their children were required to remain in school until the age of 16, they were more likely to exit the community. This high rate of exit would, they argued, result in the failure of the Amish way of life to persist over time (Burtt 1994). The right of exemption the Amish claimed was, in this case, derivative of the larger demand for cultural self-preservation; without the exemption, they said, the culture itself might fade away.

A state may also be asked to respect certain domains of legal authority, perhaps most frequently in the domain of family law. Minority communities often regulate the conditions of marriage, and custody of children, as well as divorce, and request the legal authority to do so. Respecting the legal authority of minority communities to exercise jurisdiction in family law is the kind of request that often troubles critics of cultural minority rights, since it may entrench disadvantages to women, for example in divorce settlements or custody agreements (Shachar 2001; Bakht 2007). In general, then, states that acknowledge the legal authority of minority communities in the space of family law also demand that those who are participating in these adjudication proceedings do so willingly; majority states therefore often retain permission for themselves to interefere in these proceedings, in support of those who may be inadequately protected. The state must attempt a balance here, between offering its support to the most vulnerable members of a minority group (for example to ensure that their constitutional rights are protected) and interference of a kind that is inattentive to the rightful claims of minority groups to persist over time, in part by exercising its authority in key spaces.

Another common form of cultural preservation rights are exclusion rights, that is, the right of a cultural group to refuse to admit others to territory or membership, because of a worry that more generous terms of admission threatens to undermine it by, in effect, diluting it. Just as states have the putative right to control their borders (discussed below in section 3), and who can claim membership rights even after admission, so do some sub-state jurisdictions claim this double right of exclusion, citing the importance of cultural preservation. Indigenous communities have sometimes claimed the right to exclude non-Indigenous individuals from settling on their territories or the right to exclude others (for example non-Indigenous spouses of Indigenous persons) from certain membership benefits, including the right to vote (or otherwise have a say) for those who will govern. State courts have been asked to adjudicate the rightful authority of Indigenous communities to make these determinations (see Song 2005).

The cultural preservation rights described above pose a difficult challenge, connected to the critiques of treating culture as an encompassing group: any claim for cultural preservation, say some critics, translates in effect into problematic claims of control over members, which, moreover, are typically most restrictive for women and LGBTQ+ members of a cultural group. This is a challenge posed most forcefully where rights of cultural preservation are demanded by so-called illiberal groups like the Amish, and where they are (in the eyes of critics) imposed on children against their will. Illiberal groups are those which deny certain key liberal values, like autonomy and equality; in many cases, these communities are supported by educational systems that discourage autonomous choice-making, by avoiding the teaching of skills and capacities that typically enable it, and by enforcing hierarchical rules that elevate some members over others in ways that egalitarians find uncomfortable. The worry is that the community wants not only to preserve itself as a distinct cultural group, but also that it wants to protect a kind of cultural homogeneity that leaves no room for contestation or dissent over its central values and practices. These latter hierarchical rules often render women vulnerable to more powerful men, who may demand various forms of sexual subservience to them, who relegate them to the home to care for children, and who impose rigid codes of behaviour on them, for which harsh penalties are meted out in cases of violation. These kinds of so-called “cultural practices” are, for some critics, such that they render any form of state support in protecting minority cultural groups largely indefensible (Okin 1999). 

A worry that runs through objections to these many cultural preservation rights is that women may not be willing participants in these cultures, and therefore that respecting cultural preservation rights consigns women to lives they would not choose, do not want, and cannot escape. But for many it is a mistake to assume that women members are such only under duress, since many will deeply value the community itself and respect the norms and values that it seeks to protect, even if they reject certain among them. In these cases, and where political theorists consider them, there is an attempt to move from treating culture in encompassing terms towards treating it in dialogic and narrative terms. Cultures, even oppressive (to liberals) minority cultures, are subject to change, and perhaps the best source of change is deeply committed members who willingly endorse key values but reject others, including those that do not respect the equal rights of women. Monique Deveaux’s account of female adult participants in customary marriages in South Africa, who accept some elements of their culture, but who aim to gain a voice at the table to shift others, treats culture in dialogic terms (Deveaux 2007). Here, the key motivating thought is that cultures can and do shift over time, in response to how its members engage in it, and what matters is not the change itself, but who or what is its source. On this view, the objective of cultural preservation rights is not to preserve culture per se , a challenge that would prove impossible in any case, but rather the right to protect the ability of group members to shape their culture and to protect it against unwelcome sources of change.

Others argue that so long as women, and any others subject to rigid cultural demands, possess a right (or the capacity) to exit the community, their choice to remain should be treated as such (Kukathas 1992). For those who hold this view, efforts to render the right to exit genuinely exercisable are tremendously important (Kukathas 2012; Holzleithner 2012). In so doing, a state must make a choice about the resources it provides to those members who may desire to exit, but who do not have the means to establish themselves in the larger society. In some orthodox religious communities, property is owned in common and individual members do not have any personal property or resources; as a result, exiters have nothing on which to rely while they establish their new lives. In others, members are poorly educated, and unfamiliar with life outside of their own communities, and so exit without the capacity to sustain themselves in the larger society.  So, receiving states can offer support to exiters in various ways, for example by providing shelters to exiting women (and men), in which education is provided so that they may eventually attain self-sufficiency as a member of mainstream society. The choice to support exiters may seem to undermine a culture’s capacity for self-preservation. But supporting exiters is not well-understood as denying cultural preservation rights; rather, the choice to do so stems from a state’s commitment to protecting the rights of all of its members, including the most vulnerable, as best as it can do.

The right to cultural preservation described above should be distinguished from the slightly different right against coerced cultural loss, which focuses on preservation in cases where the potential loss is the result of coercion by outside forces against which a cultural group is relatively powerless. Of course, cultural change  is inevitable in some form, as highlighted above, and especially if one holds a culture-as-dialogue view, cultures are in fact never static. Rather, practices, norms, and values that are defining of a culture at one time may cease to be centrally defining of that culture, for a whole range of reasons including economic, environmental, and political. So, in fact, some amount of cultural loss is inevitable, and moreover, it is not always to be regretted. Sometimes, it is a normal response to external factors that are beyond a culture’s control, and sometimes it is welcome because the changes result in the better protection of human rights or more inclusive cultural traditions and practices. A cultural group may choose to shift their central modes of production in response to changing environmental factors, for example. So, as Samuel Scheffler has argued, the strong preservationist view of culture—that cultures should be insulated from all forms of change—must be rejected (Scheffler 2007).

Yet, especially minority cultures may sometimes have a reasonable claim that they are not able to protect themselves against unwanted cultural change, or that they are not able to control the pace of change. They may thereby be entitled to forms of state support, to help them create the conditions under which they can resist unwanted cultural change.  When linguistic minorities request state support to persist in educating children in a minority language, for example, sometimes the justification is in the name of protecting against the erosion of the language in the face of pressure to adopt or become fluent in the majority language.

In other cases, majorities are actively focused on undermining minority cultures, often over years and even decades. Colonial states have pursued genocidal policies against Indigenous communities for example, with the expressed purpose of undermining their capacity to survive as distinct peoples. In assessing cases of cultural loss, then, a key factor is whether the shift is forced upon minority groups, not necessarily by changing environmental or economic conditions, but by agents who intend to undermine the culture, by actively disvaluing it and thereby acting so as to undermine the conditions for its robust continuity. External, malicious, factors that engender cultural change that would not otherwise be expected, make the change not only regrettable, but generate a case for reparations, for example with respect to Indigenous communities, where there is “evidence of a history of dispossession, discrimination, or subordination” (Phillips 2018: 97).

In legal environments, wrong-doers sometimes deploy a cultural defense, explaining that minority cultural norms and values, which are in tension with those of the majority, are causally relevant in explaining why they committed a wrong. A cultural defense has, thereby, sometimes been treated as a relevant mitigating factor in assigning punishment. The right to offer a cultural defense is typically justified with respect to the importance of recognizing that minorities do not always operate according to the same values and norms that are represented in the majority’s legal system, and that these differences are entitled to some consideration in legal spaces. Earlier court decisions accepted explanations that, for example, men who murdered their unfaithful partners were moved to do so by a combination of shame and rage associated with cultural norms. For example, men who claimed that “gang rape” (known culturally as marriage by capture) was mandated by Hmong culture as a way to secure a wife, in which women were not only complicit but in fact willing partners, are no longer understood to have a defense in legal suits accusing them of rape (Song 2005). However, the power of “cultural” explanations in mainstream legal spaces has decreased over time, as states have come to see how many of these defenses are in fact cover for patriarchal, misogynist attitudes that persist, both in some minority communities and in the wider community.

“Cultural” defenses of crime often amount to treating culture as though it were a homogeneous whole, and as though perpetrators of crime rather than its victims have a lock on its interpretation. But “respect for culture cannot mean deference to whatever the established authorities of culture deem right” (Gutmann 2003: 46). Additionally, a generic imperative to “respect culture” in legal spaces can ignore the differences among types of cultural expectations, which can range from permissible acts, to encouraged acts and required acts, only some of which may justifiably be treated as legally relevant (Vitikainen 2015: 162). As well, it can permit and encourage the representation of minority (especially non-western) cultures as stereotypes, and “mobilizes culture in ways that encourage absurdly large generalizations about people from particular cultural groups” (Phillips 2007: 81 & 99). The danger represented by an uncritical acceptance of the cultural defense is in a treatment of culture as so encompassing that it treats its members as incapable of autonomous decision-making. But, say critics of the cultural defense, this is a mistake—along with many other factors, culture can be part of an explanation for engaging in wrong-doing, but should “never be mistaken for the whole truth” (Phillips 2007: 98).

A final cultural right that is claimed by some is the right to control cultural artifacts or expressions, or the use of cultural content in general (Matthes 2016). This is the right that is at issue in recent controversies focused on cultural appropriation, defined as the use, by a non-member, of “something of cultural value, usually a symbol or a practice, to others” (Lenard & Balint 2020). Familiar examples of actions that have been accused of engaging in cultural appropriation include the wearing of dreadlocks by whites; the donning of Indigenous clothing as Halloween costumes; the use of turbans in high fashion; the teaching of yoga by instructors who do not have South Asian backgrounds. In all of these cases, a non-member is accused of “appropriating” a particular cultural practice or symbol that is not their own. On this view, cultures have exclusive rights to use their cultural “products” as they see fit, often because that practice is understood to be central to their identity. This perspective is controversial, and often mocked, by those who observe that history just is the mingling and sharing of cultural practices and symbols, including in the spaces of cuisine, the arts, dress and spiritual practices; their mocking treats the rights claim as relying on an understanding of culture that is unchanging and immutable over time, which is historically inaccurate and, furthermore, undesirable. Correspondingly, key cultural artifacts are best understood as belonging to “humanity”: “it isn’t peoples who experience and value art: it’s men and women” (Appiah 2009).

The right claimed—to full or exclusive use of defining cultural practices or symbols—is perhaps not best enforced by the state, though states can and do engage in practices that are attentive to the harms allegedly caused by cultural appropriation. For example, centralized support for the arts, in the form of grants to produce artistic endeavours, can be sensitive to who is asking for support to produce what , and can direct funding towards artists from a particular tradition who aim to produce culturally specific products, and correspondingly refuse (unless very good reason is offered) to support endeavours by cultural outsiders to produce “insider” art (Rowell 1995; J. O. Young 2008). The right claimed is relatively stronger where a particular cultural community is the victim of a power imbalance, where the cultural community has expressly requested that a particular practice or symbol be “left alone” by a majority community, and where members of the majority community are  profiting on the basis of its use of the particular symbol or practice (Lenard & Balint 2020). As in other cases, the right claimed by a cultural group is strongest where there are persistent inequalities between the minority claimant and the majority group.

3. Majority Cultural Rights Claims

Section 2 considered the cultural rights claims that are, usually, made by minority groups. Majority groups make cultural claims as well, in particular with respect to excluding others from their territory as well as with respect to what can be demanded of those who are admitted.

One domain in which majority communities claim a cultural right is in the space of immigration. For some, the right of states to shape their culture can legitimately serve as a reason to exclude others, in general and sometimes specific others. This view is often attributed to Michael Walzer, who argues that the right of a state to control its borders is intimately connected to its capacity to

defend the liberty and welfare, the politics and culture of a group of people committed to one another and to their common life. (Walzer 1983: 39, emphasis added)

The right of a state to control its culture is therefore an essential one to protect its “collective consciousness”, as noted in Section 1.

This claim has encountered pushback from many scholars, for multiple reasons. One reason is that the claim that a state may exclude would-be migrants for cultural reasons has too often been, in fact, an attempt to enact discriminatory legislation aimed at excluding migrants whose beliefs and practices are said to be incompatible with, or even undermining of, the values and norms that define the majority’s culture. Exclusion based on so-called cultural reasons has often been a claim that a state prefers to remain culturally, religiously, ethnically, and racially homogeneous. Historically, states engaged explicitly in such discriminatory practices, which have now been repudiated, including for example variants of Asian Exclusion Acts which were in operation in North America in the early 1900s.

The same accusation is also merited in several recent cases, such as the implementation of the so-called Muslim Ban in the United States, or with respect to proposals during the height of the crisis in Syria (2015) in some countries to prioritize Christian over Muslim refugees (Song 2018). Among political theorists of immigration, there is however widespread repudiation of discriminatory immigration policies, both explicitly and implicitly, even among those who defend the general right of states to exclude would-be migrants and refugees, for many reasons including to preserve culture (Miller 2005).

A second source of pushback stems from a more general skepticism that a majority’s culture, even if genuinely valuable to its members, should be treated as sufficiently so to warrant excluding migrants, especially necessitous ones (the language of necessity is borrowed from Song 2018). Even if it is conceded that culture is valuable to a majority, many scholars believe that its protection cannot warrant excluding those in severe need of safety or subsistence.

Yet, say those who defend the view that culture can, at least in some cases, serve to exclude migrants, there is a case to be made for treating the state as possessing the right to cultural continuity (Miller 2005). This claimed right looks very much like the right to cultural preservation (or against cultural loss) described above, and it highlights not so much the sentimental dimensions of a majority’s attachment to its culture, but rather its pragmatic interpretation. On this view, any particular state is defined by a “shared public culture” which, because shared, underpins the trust that democratic states rely on to pursue political and social objectives in common. No particular value that makes up a shared public culture is valuable in and of itself. Rather, it is the combination of a set of values, norms, and practices, that produces “our” culture that is valuable, and in its presence, trust is higher; as a result, so is the willingness to cooperate to support policies that require some sacrifice, including for example, commitment to redistributive social policies that are especially to the benefit of those who are least well-off (e.g., see the essays in Gustavsson & Miller 2019). So, according to those who defend these views, a state that seeks to exert control over admission citing “cultural” reasons is neither racist nor discriminatory, but rather is seeking controlled admission (rather than closed borders) so that newcomers can, over a sufficient time period, come to adopt enough of the set of defining values, norms, and practices, to be able to warrant and extend the trust that underpins the policies that instantiate these objectively valued goods.

States that defend the right of cultural continuity at the level of admission to a state typically also deploy the right to adopt and enforce “integration” policies that encourage newcomers to adopt majority norms and values, arguing that the faster such adoption happens, the more rapid admission itself can be. Integration policies ask newcomers to adopt the norms and practices of the majority community, whereas accommodation policies ask the majority to accommodate practices that are distinct from those that define the majority’s culture. On this conventional multicultural view, the process by which migrants are admitted to the territory, and then to membership, is a “two-way” street, requiring that both newcomers and the host state adapt in response to each other (Kymlicka 1998).

Is the demand that newcomers integrate culturally reasonable? Is it reasonable, that is, to ask immigrants to adopt the norms, values, and practices that are central to the culture they have joined (l will leave aside the question of economic and political integration, here)? Notice that in the political and sociological literature in immigration incorporation, integration (culturally) is typically distinguished from assimilation, where the former focuses on welcoming newcomers with the distinct sets of norms and values that travel with them (and so accommodating them where possible), and the latter demands that immigrants adopt as fully as possible the set of norms and values that are central to the host society (Brubaker 2001; see also Modood 2007). In the political theory literature on multiculturalism, however, it is widely accepted that a demand for full assimilation is normatively problematic (it requires too much of immigrants, to abandon their histories and identities, as part of joining a new community), but that some form of encouragement to integrate is permissible.

Whether the integration demands are permissible depends on at least two connected things, however: first, on the content of the shared public culture and, second, on the accessibility of the venues in which the content of this public culture is deliberated. The space in which a culture is deliberated is amorphous as well as expansive. The source of key norms, practices, and values is multi-fold: some are historical, some are deliberately adopted through political processes, some are accidentally adopted in response to contingent circumstances. The demand that newcomers integrate, in the sense of adopt the norms and practices of the majority culture to at least a reasonable extent is more defensible in cases where access to spaces in which they are deliberated is public and therefore open to many voices. The precise meaning of “accessibility” to spaces that are not clearly defined, and entry to which is not monitored or policed in any formal way, is challenging to pin down. But the key point is that to the extent that cultures welcome and take seriously new voices—in public media, in political spaces, and so on—they can be described as publicly accessible. So, there is a connection between the legitimacy of demanding adherence to majority culture norms and practices, as part of the process of integration, and the genuine access that newcomers have to the spaces in which they are deliberated.

In considering the second question, with respect to the content of a majority’s shared public culture, I borrow from the literature in the political theory of nationalism (though I do not believe that the language of nationalism itself is essential to appreciate its relevance to the discussion here). A culture can be defined by features that are more or less inclusive. Where cultures are defined by characteristics that are typically used to describe ethnic nations, including shared history, religion, ethnicity/race, newcomers are less easily able to join them and be recognized as full members. Where cultures are defined by characteristics that are typically used, on the other hand, to describe civic nations, including shared commitment to political institutions and, usually, a commitment to liberal democratic principles, then they are more welcoming for newcomers. In the language adopted earlier in this entry, cultures that are defined by exclusive features are more likely to treat culture as encompassing, whereas cultures that adopt inclusive features, and emphasize accessibility to the forums in which its content is deliberated, treat culture in dialogic or identity terms. This need not be the case, though, since those who treat culture in dialogic terms may nevertheless believe that key elements of history or religion are central to it (though they are open to deliberation about the appropriateness of these elements as central) and similarly identities can be formulated on the basis of exclusionary features.

Another way to define inclusivity focuses attention on the extent to which a culture’s main norms, practices, and values can be adopted by newcomers without their giving up something they value (Lenard 2019). Key here is to define the permissible contours of an inclusive culture that, at the same time, can serve to distinguish it from others in ways that resolve what philosophers have called the “particularity” problem. If cultures are defined only by commitment to liberal democratic principles and the institutions that instantiate them, then a person will necessarily be committed to any state that is so defined. But this conclusion does not make sense of the reality that many citizens are attached to their state’s interpretation of these values—fundamental, abstract, liberal democratic principles are adopted, respected, and instantiated, in other words, in a culturally specific way. It is important, then, to delineate the boundary of permissible cultural content, which can include recognition of key historical moments, or political conversations, or cultural icons. No state can demand of newcomers that their emotional commitment be to their new state; but it can reasonably impart information about learnable key cultural markers, encourage newcomers to adopt the associated practices and norms, and hope that over time their emotional identification shifts to the host state, at least partially (Carens 2005). Under the condition that the public cultural content of a host state is reasonably accessible, and that the forums in which it is deliberated are likewise reasonably accessible, then the host state can permissibly encourage the integration of newcomers. This right is perhaps best understood as derivative of the right to cultural continuity that states claim in relation to immigration, which can permissibly be claimed if and only if the accessibility conditions described above are met.

Not all scholars agree on this point, of course, and some reject entirely the suggestion that newcomers can be asked to make accommodations to the culture of the state that they have joined. Those who adopt variants on this view treat the majority’s culture as nearly always homogeneous and oppressive in ways that are disrespectful of newcomers, and treat the demand for integration along at least some dimensions as “cleaned up” variations on the discriminatory and racist immigration policies of the past (Abizadeh 2002). This is a real worry. When the Netherlands demanded that potential migrants from majority Muslim countries watch a video and pass a test merely to gain entry to its territory—a video that showed gay men kissing and a topless woman—it was widely excoriated for its discriminatory intent, rather than (as was claimed) an attempt to ensure that migrants could adopt the liberal values that supposedly characterized the country’s culture. More generally, the mechanisms of encouraging the learning and adoption of the majority culture’s values, in addition to its actual content as delineated above, as well as the consequences for failure to do so, must be scrutinized for their reasonableness. This assessment is a tricky business, certainly, made trickier because in many (if not most) immigration situations, the potential newcomer is in a situation of vulnerability in relation to the host state: their interest in gaining entry is very strong and so in many cases, they will accept heavy-handed attempts to coerce their integration without complaint.

Both minority groups (many of which are immigrant groups) and majority groups claim that “culture” is important and deserving of accommodation in multiple ways. This entry began with an examination of the multiple ways in which culture has been understood, to unpack the ways in which it is deployed when specific cultural rights are claimed. It is important to notice that these cultural claims, on both sides, are often made in relation to each other: a minority group demands a particular cultural right and the majority responds by claiming a different cultural right. In many cases, the choice to respect or ignore claimed cultural rights is framed in terms of the impact that doing so will have on the culture of the majority, for example, by stating that a particular practice for which accommodation is requested is incompatible with the majority culture in general, or sometimes more specifically with a particular practice or norm that is believed to be particularly important. The latter claim was made, for example, in France, during “l’affaire du foulard”—the right to cover one’s head as a manifestation of Islamic (or Jewish) religious commitment was denied for the way in which it compromised the French’s commitment to laicity (Laborde 2008; Benhabib 2004).

This entry has attempted to offer the resources that are essential to adjudicating these conflicts, in ways that take seriously both those who demand cultural rights and those who resist respecting them. Hopefully, future political theory can make use of this taxonomy to identify satisfactory conclusions to these conflicts when they arise.

• Abizadeh, Arash, 2002, “Does Liberal Democracy Presuppose a Cultural Nation? Four Arguments”, American Political Science Review , 96(3): 495–509. doi:10.1017/S000305540200028X
• Appiah, Kwame Anthony, 2009, “Whose Culture Is It, Anyway?”, in Cultural Heritage Issues: The Legacy of Conquest, Colonization and Commerce , edited by James A. R. Nafziger and Ann Nicgorski, Leiden: Brill, 207–21.
• Bakht, Natasha, 2007, “Religious Arbitration in Canada: Protecting Women by Protecting Them from Religion”, Canadian Journal of Women and the Law , 19(1): 119–144.
• Barry, Brian, 2001, Culture and Equality: An Egalitarian Critique of Multiculturalism , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Benhabib, Seyla, 2002, The Claims of Culture: Equality and Diversity in the Global Era , Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• –––, 2004, The Rights of Others: Aliens, Residents, and Citizens , Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511790799
• Borchers, Dagmar and Annamari Vitikainen (eds.), 2012, On Exit: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on the Right of Exit in Liberal Multicultural Societies , Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter. doi:10.1515/9783110270860
• Brubaker, Rogers, 2001, “The Return of Assimilation? Changing Perspectives on Immigration and Its Sequels in France, Germany, and the United States”, Ethnic and Racial Studies , 24(4): 531–548. doi:10.1080/01419870120049770
• Burtt, Shelley, 1994, “Religious Parents, Secular Schools: A Liberal Defense of an Illiberal Education”, The Review of Politics , 56(1): 51–70. doi:10.1017/S0034670500049500
• Carens, Joseph, 2005, “The Integration of Immigrants”, Journal of Moral Philosophy , 2(1): 29–46. doi:10.1177/1740468105052582
• Casals, Neus Torbisco, 2006, Group Rights as Human Rights: A Liberal Approach to Multiculturalism , (Law and Philosophy Library 75), Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. doi:10.1007/1-4020-4209-4
• Deveaux, Monique, 2007, Gender and Justice in Multicultural Liberal States , Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199289790.001.0001
• Dhamoon, Rita, 2006, “Shifting From ‘Culture’ to ‘the Cultural’: Critical Theorizing of Identity/Difference Politics”, Constellations , 13(3): 354–373. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8675.2006.00406.x
• Eisenberg, Avigail, 2009, Reasons of Identity: A Normative Guide to the Political and Legal Assessment of Identity Claims , Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199291304.001.0001
• Fraser, Nancy, 1995, “Recognition or Redistribution? A Critical Reading of Iris Young’s Justice and the Politics of Difference ”, Journal of Political Philosophy , 3(2): 166–180. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9760.1995.tb00033.x
• Ghosh, Cyril, 2018, De-Moralizing Gay Rights: Some Queer Remarks on LGBT+ Rights Politics in the US , Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-78840-1
• Gustavsson, Gina and David Miller (eds.), 2019, Liberal Nationalism and Its Critics: Normative and Empirical Questions , Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oso/9780198842545.001.0001
• Gutmann, Amy, 2003, Identity in Democracy , Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• Holzleithner, Elisabeth, 2012, “Interrogating Exit in Multiculturalist Theorizing: Conditions and Limitations”, in Borchers and Vitikainen 2012: 13–33. doi:10.1515/9783110270860.13
• Kukathas, Chandran, 1992, “Are There Any Cultural Rights?”, Political Theory , 20(1): 105–139. doi:10.1177/0090591792020001006
• –––, 2012, “Exit, Freedom and Gender”, in Borchers and Vitikainen 2012: 34–56. doi:10.1515/9783110270860.34
• Kymlicka, Will, 1996, Multicultural Citizenship: A Liberal Theory of Minority Rights , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• –––, 1998, Finding Our Way: Rethinking Ethnocultural Relations in Canada , Toronto: Oxford University Press.
• Laborde, Cecile, 2008, Critical Republicanism: The Hijab Controversy and Political Philosophy , Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199550210.001.0001
• Lenard, Patti Tamara.,2012, Trust, Democracy and Multicultural Challenges , University Park, PA: Pennsylvania University State Press.
• –––, 2019, “Inclusive Identities: The Foundation of Trust in Multicultural Communities”, in Gustavsson and Miller 2019: 155–171. doi:10.1093/oso/9780198842545.003.0009
• Lenard, Patti Tamara and Peter Balint, 2020, “What Is (the Wrong of) Cultural Appropriation?”, Ethnicities , 20(2): 331–52. doi:10.1177/1468796819866498
• Levy, Jacob, 2000, Multiculturalism of Fear , Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/0198297122.001.0001
• Margalit, Avishai and Moshe Halbertal, 1994, “Liberalism and the Right to Culture”, Social Research: An International Quarterly , 61(3): 491–510.
• Margalit, Avishai and Joseph Raz, 1990, “National Self-Determination”:, Journal of Philosophy , 87(9): 439–461. doi:10.2307/2026968
• Matthes, Erich Hatala, 2016, “Cultural Appropriation Without Cultural Essentialism?”, Social Theory and Practice , 42(2): 343–366. doi:10.5840/soctheorpract201642219
• Mcbride, Cillian, 2009, “Demanding Recognition: Equality, Respect, and Esteem”,  European Journal of Political Theory , 8(1): 96–108. doi:10.1177/1474885108096962
• Miller, David, 2005, “Immigration: The Case for Limits”, in Contemporary Debates in Applied Ethics , Andrew Cohen and Christopher Wellman (eds), Malden: Blackwell Publishers, 193–207.
• –––, 2016, “Majorities and Minarets: Religious Freedom and Public Space”, British Journal of Political Science , 46(2): 437–456. doi:10.1017/S0007123414000131
• Modood, Tariq, 2007, Multiculturalism: A Civic Idea , Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
• Moore, Margaret, 1999, “Beyond the Cultural Argument for Liberal Nationalism”, Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy , 2(3): 26–47. doi:10.1080/13698239908403282
• –––, 2019, “Liberal Nationalism and the Challenge of Essentialism”, in Gustavsson and Miller 2019: 188–202. doi:10.1093/oso/9780198842545.003.0011
• Okin, Susan Moller, 1999, Is Multiculturalism Bad for Women? Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• Parekh, Bhikhu, 2000, Rethinking Multiculturalism: Cultural Diversity and Political Theory , Basingstoke: Macmillan Press.
• Parvin, Phil, 2008, “What’s Special About Culture? Identity, Autonomy, and Public Reason”, Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy , 11(3): 315–233. doi:10.1080/13698230802276447
• Patten, Alan, 2014, Equal Recognition: The Moral Foundations of Minority Rights , Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• Phillips, Anne, 2007, Multiculturalism without Culture , Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• –––, 2010, “What’s Wrong with Essentialism?”, Distinktion: Journal of Social Theory , 11(1): 47–60. doi:10.1080/1600910X.2010.9672755
• –––, 2018, “What Makes Culture Special?”, Political Theory , 46(1): 92–98. doi:10.1177/0090591717696023
• Quong, Jonathan, 2006, “Cultural Exemptions, Expensive Tastes, and Equal Opportunities”, Journal of Applied Philosophy , 23(1): 53–71. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5930.2006.00320.x
• Rowell, John, 1995, “The Politics of Cultural Appropriation”, Journal of Value Inquiry , 29(1): 137–142.
• Scheffler, Samuel, 2007, “Immigration and the Significance of Culture”, Philosophy & Public Affairs , 35(2): 93–125. doi:10.1111/j.1088-4963.2007.00101.x
• Shachar, Ayelet, 2001, Multicultural Jurisdictions: Cultural Differences and Women’s Rights , Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511490330
• Sniderman, Paul M. and Louk Hagendoorn, 2007, When Ways of Life Collide , Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• Song, Sarah, 2005, “Majority Norms, Multiculturalism, and Gender Equality”, American Political Science Review , 99(4): 473–489. doi:10.1017/S0003055405051828
• –––, 2009, “The Subject of Multiculturalism: Culture, Religion, Language, Ethnicity, Nationality, and Race?”, in New Waves in Political Philosophy , Boudewijn de Bruin and Christopher F. Zurn (eds.), London: Palgrave Macmillan UK, 177–197. doi:10.1057/9780230234994_10
• –––, 2018, Immigration and Democracy , Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oso/9780190909222.001.0001
• Spinner-Halev, Jeff, 2000, Surviving Diversity: Religion and Democratic Citizenship , Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
• Tully, James, 1995, Strange Multiplicity: Constitutionalism in the Age of Diversity , Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
• Vitikainen, Annamari, 2015, The Limits of Liberal Multiculturalism: Towards an Individuated Approach to Cultural Diversity , London: Palgrave Macmillan UK. doi:10.1057/9781137404626
• Walzer, Michael, 1983, Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pluralism and Equality , New York: Basic Books.
• Young, Iris Marion, 2004, “Two Concepts of Self-Determination”, in Ethnicity, Nationalism, and Minority Rights , Stephen May, Tariq Modood, and Judith Squires (eds.), Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 176–196. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511489235.009
• Young, James O., 2008, Cultural Appropriation and the Arts , Malden, MA: Blackwell.

How to cite this entry . Preview the PDF version of this entry at the Friends of the SEP Society . Look up topics and thinkers related to this entry at the Internet Philosophy Ontology Project (InPhO). Enhanced bibliography for this entry at PhilPapers , with links to its database.

• Sikh Faith FAQs , World Sikh Organization of Canada.

citizenship | cultural heritage, ethics of | culture: and cognitive science | identity | multiculturalism | rights: group

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank Matthias Hoesch, Margaret Moore, and Stéfanie Morris for comments on an earlier draft of this entry.

Copyright © 2020 by Patti Tamara Lenard < Patti . Lenard @ uottawa . ca >

• Accessibility

Support SEP

Mirror sites.

View this site from another server:

• Info about mirror sites

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy is copyright © 2023 by The Metaphysics Research Lab , Department of Philosophy, Stanford University

Library of Congress Catalog Data: ISSN 1095-5054

culture: The Nature of Culture

• The Nature of Culture

Culture is based on the uniquely human capacity to classify experiences, encode such classifications symbolically, and teach such abstractions to others. It is usually acquired through enculturation, the process through which an older generation induces and compels a younger generation to reproduce the established lifestyle; consequently, culture is embedded in a person's way of life. Culture is difficult to quantify, because it frequently exists at an unconscious level, or at least tends to be so pervasive that it escapes everyday thought. This is one reason that anthropologists tend to be skeptical of theorists who attempt to study their own culture. Anthropologists employ fieldwork and comparative, or cross-cultural, methods to study various cultures. Ethnographies may be produced from intensive study of another culture, usually involving protracted periods of living among a group. Ethnographic fieldwork generally involves the investigator assuming the role of participant-observer: gathering data by conversing and interacting with people in a natural manner and by observing people's behavior unobstrusively. Ethnologies use specialized monographs in order to draw comparisons among various cultures.

Sections in this article:

• Introduction
• Theories of Culture
• Bibliography

The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, 6th ed. Copyright © 2024, Columbia University Press. All rights reserved.

See more Encyclopedia articles on: Anthropology: Terms and Concepts

The Nature-Culture Divide

Emmanuel Benner / Getty Images

• Philosophical Theories & Ideas
• Major Philosophers

• Ph.D., Philosophy, Columbia University
• M.A., Philosophy, Columbia University
• B.A., Philosophy, University of Florence, Italy

Nature and culture are often seen as opposite ideas—what belongs to nature cannot be the result of human intervention and, on the other hand, cultural development is achieved against nature. However, this is by far not the only take on the relationship between nature and culture. Studies in the evolutionary development of humans suggest that culture is part and parcel of the ecological niche within which our species thrived, thus rendering culture a chapter in the biological development of a species .

An Effort Against Nature

Several modern authors—such as Rousseau—saw the process of education as a struggle against the most eradicated tendencies of human nature. Humans are born with wild dispositions, such as the one of using violence to achieve one’s own goals, to eat and behave in a disorganized fashion, and/or to act egotistically. Education is that process which uses culture as an antidote against our wildest natural tendencies; it is thanks to culture that the human species could progress and elevate itself above and beyond other species.

A Natural Effort

Over the past century and a half, however, studies in the history of human development have clarified how the formation of what we refer to as " culture " in an anthropological sense is part of the biological adaptation of our ancestors to the environmental conditions in which they came to live. Consider, for example, hunting. Such an activity seems an adaptation, which allowed hominids to move from the forest into the savannah some millions of year ago, opening up the opportunity to change diet and living habits. At the same time, the invention of weapons is directly related to that adaptation—but from weapons descend also a whole series of skill sets characterizing our cultural profile, from butchering tools to ethical rules relating to the proper use of weapons (e.g., should they be turned against other human beings or against uncooperative species?). Hunting also seems responsible for a whole set of bodily abilities, such as balancing on one foot as humans are the only primates that can do that. Now, think of how this very simple thing is crucially connected to dance, a key expression of human culture. It is then clear that our biological development is closely tied to our cultural development.

Culture as an Ecological Niche

The view that came to be most plausible over the past decades seems to be that culture is part of the ecological niche within which humans live. Just as snails carry their shell, so do we bring along our culture.

Now, the transmission of culture seems not to be directly related to the transmission of genetic information. Certainly the significant overlap between the genetic makeup of humans is a premise for the development of a common culture that can be passed along from one generation to the next. However, cultural transmission is also horizontal among individuals within the same generation or among individuals belonging to different populations. You can learn how to make lasagna even if you were born from Korean parents in Kentucky just as you can learn how to speak Tagalog even if none of your immediate family or friends speak that language.

Further Readings on Nature and Culture

The online sources on the nature-culture divide are scarce. Luckily, there are a number of good bibliographical resources that can help out. Here is a list of few of the more recent ones, from which older takes on the topic can be recovered:

• Peter Watson, The Great Divide: Nature and Human Nature in the Old World and the New , Harper, 2012.
• Alan H. Goodman, Deborah Heat, and Susan M. Lindee, Genetic Nature/Culture: Anthropology and Science Beyond the Two-Culture Divide , University of California Press, 2003.
• Rodney James Giblett, The Body of Nature and Culture , Palgrave Macmillan, 2008.
• The Idea of Nature
• What Makes Us Human?
• Philosophy of Culture
• Arguments Against Relativism
• What Is Verbal Violence?
• Nietzsche's "The Use And Abuse Of History"
• How Do Philosophers Think About Beauty?
• Psychological Egoism
• Nietzsche's Concept of the Will to Power
• Political Science
• Socratic Wisdom
• What Does Nietzsche Mean When He Says That God Is Dead?
• Hard Determinism Explained
• The Ethics of Lying
• Existentialism Essay Topics

Cross-Cultural Psychology

Nature and nurture: how culture shapes us, insights from cultural psychology..

Updated October 10, 2023 | Reviewed by Gary Drevitch

• Our cultures are engrained in our minds and brains, affecting our psychology.
• There are various explanations for the differences between cultures, including aspects of ecology.
• Emotion, cognition, and construal of the self are all impacted by our cultures.

A well-known analogy developed by anthropologist Edward T. Hall in the 1970s imagines culture as an iceberg. What typically grabs the attention – the way people talk, dress, and behave in any given culture – is merely the visible tip. The vast majority of it – values, attitudes, perceptions – remains under the surface, hidden from view.

There is a lot to discover about the deeper parts of the iceberg, including how culture is engrained in our minds and brains.

“Nature is nurtured,” says cultural psychologist Cristina Salvador. “That means that repeated engagement in our cultural environments can shape not only our psychology, but also our physiology, neural responses, the structural volume of our brains, and even our genes .”

Here are various ways that our cultures shape us, according to the latest research in cultural psychology.

1. Cultural values and agriculture. The crops that were traditionally grown in different communities may have given rise to large-scale differences in cultural values. For example, growing labor-intensive rice fostered collectivism because it required cooperation among populations. Conversely, lands that were more suitable for low-labor crops like wheat, and where people therefore didn’t need to depend on each other as much, nurtured individualism. Our environments can affect us in more ways than we imagine. In fact, 20 percent of the differences between cultures have been attributed to various aspects of our ecology.

2. The church says no. Another surprising link between our psychology and the environment comes from the ban on incest that the Roman Catholic Church initiated during the Middle Ages in Europe. While protecting family assets, cousin marriages fostered “ conformity , nepotism, tradition and obedience to authority.” Researchers believe that by shifting the focus away from kin-based institutions, Western societies began moving toward individualistic values and traits, including “independence, creativity , and willingness to trust strangers.” Apparently, the “Speak now or forever hold your peace” part of modern-day wedding ceremonies has its origins in sixth-century C.E. Back then, the inquiry for any last-minute objections to the marriage by church officials probably included the question, “Is anyone here aware whether these two are cousins?”

3. Tight and loose cultures. Societies that historically endured higher levels of threat – from natural disasters to wars – have stricter social norms, are considered more tight than loose , and are more likely to punish citizens for going against social norms. Since infectious diseases spread easily from person to person, research shows that certain norms, particularly a country’s tendency to be open to strangers and freely choose friendships ( relational mobility) predicted a faster spread of COVID-19 .

Our inner lives

1. Daily emotions. “The relative prominence of what emotions you experience might be shaped by your culture,” says Salvador. People in interdependent cultures have a tendency toward expressing socially engaging emotions. Whether positive ( friendliness ) or negative ( shame ), these emotions foster social connectedness with others. Recent research points to interesting variations in these tendencies among different interdependent cultures . For example, Latin Americans tend to express more positive engaging emotions, while the Japanese are more expressive of negative engaging emotions. In contrast, European Americans express more socially disengaging emotions that promote personal autonomy. “You can display pride because you did something great, or frustration because something didn’t work out. But they don’t really help you with your connections,” says Salvador.

2. Flavors of happiness . Most of us value happiness. Yet, we might define, conceptualize, and express happiness differently depending on where we are from. “In some cultures, happiness is understood as more dialectical , almost contradictory – the good comes with the bad,” says Salvador. Even our preferences for the flavor of happiness can vary depending on our cultures. For example, research on ideal affect has shown that people from some cultures (e.g. Hong Kong) ideally prefer to experience low arousal positive emotions like calm , while others (e.g. European Americans) want to feel more high arousal positive emotions like excitement . These preferences can shape various aspects of daily life – from health to social judgments.

3. Explaining others' behavior. The analytical vs. holistic distinction of cognitive styles can impact how we explain others’ behavior. “When someone cuts you off on the road, you could think of it in two different ways,” says Salvador. “You might automatically ascribe a trait to them ( What a jerk! ). Or you could think about the situational factors that prompted them to act in that way ( Maybe they’re having an emergency and need to rush to the hospital .).” In the first way of thinking ( analytical ), you are focusing on people’s internal traits by making quick judgments about their dispositions ( dispositional attributions ). In the second case, you are giving more weight to external, contextual factors ( situational attributions ). The dispositional bias is weaker in interdependent cultures .

Independent self vs. interdependence

1. Different goals . What impacts your self-esteem more, success or failure? Depending on our cultural contexts, our tendencies for self-enhancement or self-improvement can shape how we construct our sense of self. In a recent study , Salvador and her colleagues explored the neural measures of classical findings on the differences between self-enhancement and self-criticism across cultures. “Americans showed an increase in alpha-wave brain responses when they encountered successes rather than failures. Not only were they more impacted by their successes, but they also spontaneously incorporated their successes into self-knowledge.” The Taiwanese participants in their study showed the opposite pattern and were impacted by failures more than successes. According to Salvador, the differences in our cultural goals regarding the self – how important it is for our self-worth to maximize positive feelings and internal attributes – can affect how we maintain our self-esteem.

2. Stress and coping strategies. Stress is a ubiquitous companion of daily existence. Yet, culture can play a key role in how people interpret stress, as well as what strategies they use to cope with it. For example, a recent study showed that European Canadians relied more on primary rather than secondary control strategies to cope with stress. Primary control orientation allows individuals to exert direct influence on the external environment in order to make it less stressful for them, as opposed to merely accommodating the demands of the situation (secondary contro l ). The study further showed that the Japanese had more flexibility in the way they coped with daily stressors, using both primary and secondary control strategies. Culture can also influence how people make meaning of stressful experiences, in turn affecting their coping style (for example, by using acceptance or positive reframing).

3. Self-compassion. Self-compassion refers to the way we relate to ourselves when we are suffering. According to Kristin Neff, a pioneering psychologist in self-compassion research, self-compassion consists of three main elements : “how people emotionally respond to suffering (with kindness or judgment), how they cognitively understand their predicament (as part of the human experience or as isolating), and how they pay attention to suffering (in a mindful or overly identified manner)” (Neff, 2023). Over the past two decades, thousands of studies have established a robust link between self-compassion and various facets of well-being – from reducing psychopathology to improving physical and mental health. While culture can influence the way people relate to themselves (for example, research points to differences in self-compassion scores across cultures), interventions that promote self-compassion appear to yield similar benefits. Being kind to ourselves is good for all of us.

Many thanks to Cristina Salvador for her time and insights. Dr. Salvador is Assistant Professor of Psychology and Neuroscience at Duke University where she heads the Duke Culture Lab.

Kitayama, S., & Salvador, C. E. (2017). Culture embrained: Going beyond the nature-nurture dichotomy. Perspectives on Psychological Science , 12 (5), 841-854.

Kitayama, S., Salvador, C. E., Nanakdewa, K., Rossmaier, A., San Martin, A., & Savani, K. (2022). Varieties of interdependence and the emergence of the Modern West: Toward the globalizing of psychology. American Psychologist , 77 (9), 991.

Kitayama, S., & Salvador, C. E. (2023). Cultural Psychology: Beyond East and West. Annual Review of Psychology , 75 .

Wormley, A. S., Kwon, J. Y., Barlev, M., & Varnum, M. E. (2023). How much cultural variation around the globe is explained by ecology?. Proceedings of the Royal Society B , 290 (2000), 20230485.

Uchida, Y., & Kitayama, S. (2009). Happiness and unhappiness in east and west: themes and variations. Emotion , 9 (4), 441.

Salvador, C., Carlier, S. I., Ishii, K., Castillo, C. T., Nanakdewa, K., Alvaro, S. M., ... & Kitayama, S. (2020). Emotionally expressive interdependence in Latin America: triangulating through a comparison of three cultural regions. Emotion, in press.

Morris, M. W., & Peng, K. (1994). Culture and cause: American and Chinese attributions for social and physical events. Journal of Personality and Social psychology , 67 (6), 949.

Miller, J. G. (1984). Culture and the development of everyday social explanation. Journal of personality and social psychology , 46 (5), 961.

Kitayama, S., Park, H., Sevincer, A. T., Karasawa, M., & Uskul, A. K. (2009). A cultural task analysis of implicit independence: comparing North America, Western Europe, and East Asia. Journal of personality and social psychology , 97 (2), 236.

Talhelm, T. (2020). Emerging evidence of cultural differences linked to rice versus wheat agriculture. Current opinion in psychology , 32 , 81-88.

Talhelm, T., Zhang, X., Oishi, S., Shimin, C., Duan, D., Lan, X., & Kitayama, S. (2014). Large-scale psychological differences within China explained by rice versus wheat agriculture. Science , 344 (6184), 603-608.

McDermott-Murphy, C. (2019). Targeting incest and promoting individualism. The Harvard Gazette.

Salvador, C. E., Berg, M. K., Yu, Q., San Martin, A., & Kitayama, S. (2020). Relational mobility predicts faster spread of COVID-19: A 39-country study. Psychological Science , 31 (10), 1236-1244.

Salvador, C. E., Kamikubo, A., Kraus, B., Hsiao, N.-C., Hu, J.-F., Karasawa, M., & Kitayama, S. (2022). Self-referential processing accounts for cultural variation in self-enhancement versus criticism: An electrocortical investigation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 151 (8), 1904–1918

Price, M. (2019). How the early Christian church gave birth to today’s WEIRD Europeans. Science .

Dean, K. K., & Koenig, A. M. (2019). Cross‐Cultural Differences and Similarities in Attribution. Cross‐Cultural Psychology: Contemporary Themes and Perspectives , 575-597.

Tsai, J. L. (2017). Ideal affect in daily life: Implications for affective experience, health, and social behavior. Current Opinion in Psychology , 17 , 118-128.

Tsai, J. L. (2007). Ideal affect: Cultural causes and behavioral consequences. Perspectives on Psychological Science , 2 (3), 242-259.

Barreto, M., Victor, C., Hammond, C., Eccles, A., Richins, M. T., & Qualter, P. (2021). Loneliness around the world: Age, gender, and cultural differences in loneliness. Personality and Individual Differences , 169 , 110066.

Han, J. Y., Lee, H., Ohtsubo, Y., & Masuda, T. (2022). Culture and stress coping: Cultural variations in the endorsement of primary and secondary control coping for daily stress across European Canadians, East Asian Canadians, and the Japanese. Japanese Psychological Research , 64 (2), 141-155.

Schulz, J. F., Bahrami-Rad, D., Beauchamp, J. P., & Henrich, J. (2019). The Church, intensive kinship, and global psychological variation. Science , 366 (6466), eaau5141.

Ji, L. J., Yap, S., Khei, Z. A. M., Wang, X., Chang, B., Shang, S. X., & Cai, H. (2022). Meaning in Stressful Experiences and Coping Across Cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology , 53 (9), 1015-1032.

Neff, K. D. (2023). Self-compassion: Theory, method, research, and intervention. Annual review of psychology , 74 , 193-218.

Arimitsu, K. (2023). Self-Compassion Across Cultures. Handbook of Self-Compassion , 129-141.

Marianna Pogosyan, Ph.D. , is a lecturer in Cultural Psychology and a consultant specialising in cross-cultural transitions.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Teletherapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Therapy Center NEW
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

Understanding what emotional intelligence looks like and the steps needed to improve it could light a path to a more emotionally adept world.

• Coronavirus Disease 2019
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

How to Write a Cultural Identity Essay With Tips and Examples

11 December 2023

last updated

Writing a cultural identity essay is an exciting academic exercise that allows students to develop and utilize critical thinking, reflective, and analytical skills. Unlike a standard essay, this type of paper requires learners to use first-person language throughout. In essence, a cultural identity essay is about writers and what makes them identify with a particular cultural orientation. When writing a cultural identity essay, authors should choose a specific identity and focus on it throughout their texts. Moreover, they should reflect and brainstorm, use the “show, not tell” method, utilize transitions to create a natural flow, and proofread their papers to eliminate mistakes and errors. Hence, students need to learn how to write a cultural identity essay to provide high-quality papers to their readers.

Definition of a Cultural Identity Essay

Students undertake different writing exercises in the learning environment to develop their critical thinking, reflective, and analytical skills. Basically, one of these exercises is academic writing , and among different types of essays that students write is a cultural identity essay. In this case, it is a type of essay where authors write about their culture, which entails exploring and explaining the significance of their cultural identity. Moreover, there are numerous topics that instructors may require students to write about in a cultural identity essay. For example, some of these essay topics fall under different disciplines, such as religion, socio-economic status, family, education, ethnicity, and business. In essence, the defining features of a cultural identity essay are what aspects make authors know that they are writing in this type of essay. In turn, these features include language, nationality, gender, history, upbringing, and religion, among many others.

Differences Between a Cultural Identity Essay and Other Papers

Generally, a cultural identity essay is similar to a standard essay regarding an essay structure and an essay outline . However, the point of difference is the topic. While standard essays, such as argumentative, persuasive, and informative essays, require learners to use third-person language, such a paper requires them to use first-person language. In this case, when writing a cultural identity essay, authors should use the word “I” throughout to show the audience that they are writing from their perspective. Indeed, this aspect is the primary objective of a cultural identity essay – to give the writer’s perspective concerning their culture. Besides, another point of difference between a cultural identity essay and other papers is that the former does not require writers to utilize external sources but to write from a personal viewpoint.

List of Possible Examples of Cultural Identity Essay Topics

1. cultural identity and socialization in a learning environment.

Here, a cultural identity essay prompt may require students to discuss the significance of culture in education, focusing on cultural identity and socialization. As such, this topic requires writers to reflect on how culture influences behavior in a learning environment.

2. The Impact of Culture Change on Family

Here, this prompt may require students to explore and discuss how culture impacts a family unit. Moreover, the theme is a family, and the students’ mission would be to explain how culture in all its dynamics affects families in diverse settings.

3. The Role of Language in Building a Cultural Identity

Here, instructions may require students to explore and explain the significance of language in cultural identity. Hence, writers should focus on explaining the place of culture in the sociology discipline, focusing on the connection between language and cultural identity.

4. The Significance of Culture in a Globalized Economy

Here, a cultural identity essay topic may require students to explore and discuss how culture affects individuals and businesses in today’s connected world. Also, the students’ task would be to explain how culture, in all its dynamics, such as language, is essential in business for individuals and enterprises.

5. How Culture Influences Relations in the Workplace

Here, an essay prompt may require students to explore and explain how culture, in all its dynamics, affects or influences social relations at the workplace. In turn, the task of writers, for example, would be to focus on how Human Resource (HR) departments can use culture to enrich workplace relations.

6. The Place of Culture in Individuals’ Self-Concept

Here, an analysis of a theme may require students to reflect on how their cultural orientation has affected their self-concept. Moreover, the student’s task would be to discuss how culture and its dynamics enable individuals to build a strong or weak understanding of themselves.

7. The Importance of Cultural Orientation in a Multicultural Environment

Here, assignment instructions may require students to explore and discuss how their cultural orientation enables them to operate in a culturally diverse environment, such as a school or workplace. In this case, the student’s task would be to explain how cultural characteristics, such as language and religion, facilitate or hamper social competency in a multicultural setting. 

8. How Global Conflicts Disturb Cultural Identity for Refugees

Here, this example of a cultural identity topic may require students to explore and explain how conflicts in today’s world, such as civil unrest, affect the cultural identity of those who flee to foreign countries. Also, the student’s task would be to explain how one’s culture is affected in a new environment with totally different cultural dynamics.

9. The Challenges of Acculturation

Here, a cultural identity essay prompt may require students to explore and explain the challenges that individuals face in identifying with the dominant culture. In particular, the student’s task would be to explain the significance of the dominant culture and what those from other cultures that try to identify with it must confront.

10. Host Country Culture and Multinational Enterprises

Here, this prompt sample may require students to explore and explain how a host country’s culture affects expatriates working for multinational corporations. Besides, the students’ task would be to show how one’s culture defines their behaviors and how that can be affected in a new environment with new cultural characteristics.

11. Compare and Contrast Native Culture and Dominant Culture in the United States

Here, such instructions require students to explain specific areas of similarity and difference between the Native culture and the dominant culture. In turn, the students’ task would be to define the Native culture and the dominant culture and help the audience to understand whether they mean the same thing. Hence, whether they do or do not, students should elaborate.

12. The Objective of Acculturation

Here, this example of a cultural identity essay topic requires students to explore and explain why people prefer to identify with the dominant culture. Moreover, the students’ task would be to note the advantages of the dominant culture over others and the opportunities that one may access to identify with this dominant culture.

13. The Challenges That the LGBTQ Community Faces in the Modern World

Here, essay prompt instructions require students to explore and discuss the challenges that lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transgender people face in their normal day-to-day activities. In this case, the students’ task would be to explain the uniqueness of the LGBTQ community and how stereotyping makes their lives miserable in an environment where people are intolerant of different personalities and viewpoints.

14. Dangers of Cultural Intolerance in the Health Care System

Here, instructions may require students to explore and discuss how nurses that are intolerant to cultural differences may jeopardize patients’ lives.

15. Advantages and Disadvantages of Acculturation

Here, a cultural identity essay prompt requires students to discuss the pros and cons of identifying with the dominant culture.

How Students Know if They Write a Cultural Identity Essay

The defining features of a cultural identity essay give students the indication that they need to write this kind of essay. Basically, when learners read instructions regarding their essay topics they need to write about, they should identify one or several defining elements. In turn, these elements include language, nationality, religion, ethnicity, and gender.

Structure of a Cultural Identity Essay

As stated previously, the primary point of similarity between a cultural identity essay and standard papers is an essay structure and an essay outline. Basically, this structure and outline comprise of three main sections: introduction, body, and conclusion. Like in all other essays, writing a cultural identity essay requires students to address specific issues, which are, in essence, the defining characteristics of the essay’s structure and outline.

I. Introduction and Its Defining Characteristics

The introduction is the first paragraph of a cultural identity essay. Here, students introduce themselves to the audience, giving a brief background of their cultural identity. Moreover, rules of academic writing dictate that this part should not exceed 10 percent of the entire paper. In this case, writers should be brief and concise. Then, the most prominent component of this section is a thesis, a statement that appears at the end of an introduction paragraph and whose objective is to indicate the writer’s mission. In summary, the introduction part’s defining features are the writer’s background and thesis statement . In turn, the former gives a hint about a writer, and the latter provides the audience with insight into the writer’s objective in writing a cultural identity essay.

The body of a cultural identity essay is the most significant section of a paper and takes the largest part. Generally, writers use several paragraphs to advance different arguments to explain specific concepts. In a cultural identity essay, writers can use different paragraphs to explain important aspects of their cultural identity. Nonetheless, what determines the number of paragraphs and the content of each is a paper topic. Also, the most prominent defining features of a cultural identity essay’s body are paragraphs, with each advancing a unique concept about the writer’s cultural identity. In turn, paragraphs are where writers provide real-life experiences and other personal anecdotes that help the audience to develop a deeper understanding of authors from a cultural perspective.

III. Conclusion

The conclusion part is the last section of a cultural identity essay. In particular, writers restate a thesis statement and summarize the main points from body paragraphs. Moreover, authors provide concluding remarks about a topic, which is mostly an objective personal opinion. In summary, the conclusion part’s defining features are a restatement of a thesis, a summary of the main points, and the writer’s final thoughts about a topic.

Outline Template for a Cultural Identity Essay

I. Introduction

A. Hook statement/sentence. B. Background information. C. A thesis statement that covers the main ideas from 1 to X in one sentence.

II. Body Paragraphs

A. Idea 1 B. Idea 2 … X. Idea X

A. Restating a thesis statement. B. Summary of the main points from A to X. C. Final thoughts.

An Example of a Cultural Identity Essay

Topic: Identifying as a Naturalist

I. Introduction Sample in a Cultural Identity Essay

The period of birth marks the beginning of one’s identity, with culture playing a significant role. However, from the stage of adolescence going forward, individuals begin to recognize and understand their cultural makeup. In my case, I have come to discover my love for nature, an aspect that I believe has made me a naturalist both in belief and action.

II. Examples of Body Paragraphs in a Cultural Identity Essay

A. idea 1: parents.

Parents play a critical role in shaping the cultural and personal identity of their children. In my case, it is my mother who has instilled in me a love for nature. Although I may not say exactly when this love started, I can only reason that since it was ingrained in me since childhood, it has developed gradually.

B. Idea 2: Naturalism

Today, naturalism defines my interactions with people and the environment. In short, I can say it shapes my worldview. As a lover of nature herself, my mother had this habit of taking me outdoors when I was a toddler. I have seen family photographs of my mother walking through parks and forests holding my hand. What is noticeable in these pictures besides my mother and me is the tree cover that gives the setting such a lovely sight. Moreover, I can now understand why I seem more conversant with the names and species of flowers, trees, and birds than my siblings- my mother was the influence. In turn, my siblings and friends make a joke that I have developed a strong love for nature to the point of identifying myself with the environment. Hence, the basis for this argument is my love for the green color, where even my clothes and toys are mostly green.

III. Conclusion Sample of a Cultural Identity Essay

Naturally, human beings behave in line with their cultural background and orientation. Basically, this behavior is what determines or reflects their cultural identity. In turn, my intense love for nature underscores my naturalist identity. While I may not tell the stage in life when I assumed this identity, I know my mother has played a significant role in shaping it, and this is since childhood.

Summing Up on How to Write a Good Cultural Identity Essay

Like any standard paper, writing a cultural identity essay allows students to build essential skills, such as critical thinking, reflective, and analytical skills. In this case, the essence of a paper is to provide the writer’s cultural identity, background, or orientation. Therefore, in order to learn how to write a good cultural identity essay, students should master the following tips:

• Decide where to focus. Culture is a broad topic, and deciding what to focus on is essential in producing a cultural identity essay. For example, one may have several cultural identities, and addressing all may lead to inconclusive explanations.
• Reflect and brainstorm. Given the close link between one’s cultural identity and personal experiences, learners need to reflect on experiences that would provide the audience with an accurate picture of their cultural identity.
• Adopt the “Show, not tell” approach by providing vivid details about one’s experiences. Using personal anecdotes may be effective in accomplishing this objective.
• Use transitions , such as “therefore,” “thus,” ” additionally,” and “furthermore,” to enhance a natural and logical flow throughout the essay.
• Stay personal by using first-person language to describe one’s background and experiences.
• Proofread a cultural identity essay to eliminate spelling and grammatical mistakes and other notable errors, such as an inconsistent life storyline.

To Learn More, Read Relevant Articles

How to cite a dsm-5 in apa 7 and 6: guidelines with examples, how to cite an encyclopedia in mla 9: the main rules with examples.

Beyond the Nature-Culture Dualism

• Published: 30 March 2014
• Volume 15 , pages 155–175, ( 2000 )

Cite this article

• Yrjö Haila 1  

4942 Accesses

93 Citations

26 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

It is commonly accepted that the western view of humanity’s place in nature is dominated by a dualistic opposition between nature and culture. Historically this has arisen from externalization of nature in both productive and cognitive practices; instances of such externalization have become generalized. I think the dualism can be decomposed by identifying dominant elements in each particular instantiation and showing that their strict separation evaporates under close scrutiny. The philosophical challenge this perspective presents is to substitute concrete socioecological analysis for foundational metaphysics. A review of major interpretations of the history of the dualism in Western thought indicates that the legacy is more multistranded than is usually admitted. Modern science is often assumed to lie squarely within the dualism, but this is unfounded. In contrast, science provides tools for contextual analysis on how human activities and natural processes merge. The dualism thus evaporates in actual research practice. Nevertheless, the foundational metaphysics needs to be challenged, primarily because of its paralyzing effect on environmental philosophy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

How to Promote Responsible Conducts Towards the Environment: A Semiotic Cultural Psychological Analysis

Environmental Ethics in the Context of African Traditional Thought: Beyond the Impasse

Living with Nature Across Time, Space and Cultural Perspectives: Introduction

Arendt, H.: 1958, The Human Condition , The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Google Scholar  

Bauman, Z.: 1987, Legislators and Interpreters. On Modernity, Post-Modernity and Intellectuals , Polity Press, Oxford.

Braudel, F.: 1984, Civilization & Capitalism 15th-18th Century, Vol 3. The Perspective of the World , William Collins Sons & Co, London.

Collingwood, R.G.: 1945, The Idea of Nature , Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Connolly, W.E.: 1993, ‘Voices from the Whirlwind’, in J. Bennett and W. Chaloupka (eds.), In the Nature of Things. Language, Politics, and the Environment , The University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, pp. 197–225.

Cronon, W.: 1991, Nature ’s Metropolis. Chicago and the Great West, W.W. Norton & Co, New York.

Danto, A.: 1986, The Philosophical Disenfranchisement of Art , Columbia University Press, New York.

Dewey, J.: 1929, Experience and Nature , Open Court, La Salle, IL.

Book   Google Scholar  

Dryzek, J.: 1983, ‘Ecological Rationality’, International Journal of Environmental Studies 21 , 5–10.

Article   Google Scholar  

Dryzek, J.: 1987, Rational Ecology. Environment and Political Economy , Basil Blackwell, Oxford.

Dyke, C.: 1985, ‘Complexity and Closure’, in D.J. Depew and B.H. Weber (eds.), Evolution at a Crossroads. The New Biology and the New Philosophy of Science , The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 97–131.

Dyke, C.: 1988, The Evolutionary Dynamics of Complex Systems. A Study in Biosocial Complexity , Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Dyke, C.: 1994, ‘The World around Us and How We Make It: Human Ecology as Human Artefact’, Advances in Human Ecology 3 , 1–22.

Dyke, C.: 1997, ‘The Heuristics of Ecological Interactions’, Advances in Human Ecology 7 , 49–74.

Dyson, T.: 1996, Population and Food. Global Trends and Future Prospect , Routledge, London.

Ehrlich, P.R.: 1968, The Population Bomb , Ballantine, New York.

Ehrlich, P.R.: 1993, ‘The Scale of the Human Enterprise’, in D.A. Saunders, R.J. Hobbs and P.R. Ehrlich (eds.), Nature Conservation 3. The Reconstruction of Fragmented Ecosystems , Surrey Beatty & Sons, Chipping Norton, NSW, pp. 3–8.

Ellen, R.: 1982, Environment, Subsistence and System. The Ecology of Small-scale Social Formations , Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Foucault, M.: 1970, The Order of Things. An Archaeology of the Human Sciences , Tavistock Publishers, London.

Gause, G.F.: 1934, The Struggle for Existence , Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore.

Gellner, E.: 1988, Plough, Sword and Book. The Structure of Human History , The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Gellner, E.: 1992, Reason and Culture. The Historic Role of Rationality and Rationalism , Blackwell, Oxford.

Girard, R.: 1977, Violence and the Sacred , Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.

Glacken, C.J.: 1967, Traces on the Rhodian Shore. Nature and Culture in Western Thought from Ancient Times to the End of the Eighteenth Century , University of California Press, Berkeley.

Glover, J.: 1988, I: The Philosophy and Psychology of Personal Identity , Penguin, London.

Grene, M.: 1978, ‘Paradoxes of Historicity’, Review of Metaphysics 32 , 15–36.

Grene, M.: 1985, Descartes , Harvester Press, Brighton.

Habermas, J.: 1970, Toward a Rational Society. Student Protest and Politics , Beacon Press, Boston.

Hacking, I.: 1983, Representing and Intervening. Introductory Topics in the Philosophy of Natural Science , Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Haila, Y.: 1995, ‘Natural Dynamics as a Model for Management: Is the Analogue Practicable?’ in A-L. Sippola, P. Alaraudanjoki, B. Forbes and V. Hallikainen (eds.), Northern Wilderness Areas: Ecology, Sustainability, Values , Arctic Centre Publications 7, Rovaniemi, pp. 9–26.

Haila, Y.: 1997a, ‘A “Natural” Benchmark for Ecosystem Function’, Conservation Biology 11 , 300–301.

Haila, Y.: 1997b, ‘“Wilderness” and the Multiple Layers of Environmental Thought’, Environment and History 3 , 129–147.

Haila, Y.: 1998, ‘Environmental Problems, Ecological Scales and Social Deliberation’, in P. Glasgerben (ed.), Co-Operative Environmental Governance. Public-Private Agreements as a Policy Strategy , Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, Holland, pp. 65–87.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Haila, Y.: 1999a, ‘Socioecologies.’ Ecography 22 , 337–348.

Haila. Y.: 1999b, ‘The North as/and the Other: Ecology, Domination, Solidarity’, in F. Fischer and M. Hajer (eds.), Living with Nature , Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Haila, Y. and Levins, R.: 1992, Humanity and Nature. Ecology, Science and Society , Pluto Press, London.

Haraway, D.J.: 1981-82, ‘The High Cost of Information in Post-World War II Evolutionary Biology: Ergonomics, Semiotics, and the Sociobiology of Communication Systems’, Philosophical Forum 13 , 244–278.

Haraway, D.J.: 1991, Simians, Cyborgs, and Women. The Reinvention of Nature , Routledge, London.

Heidegger, M.: 1962, Being and Time , Blackwell, Oxford.

Ingold, T.: 1992, ‘Culture and the Perception of the Environment’, in E. Croll and D. Parkin (eds.), Bush Base: Forest Farm. Culture, Environment and Development , Routledge, London, pp. 39–56.

Keller, E.F.: 1985, Reflections on Gender and Science , Yale University Press, New Haven.

Koyré, A.: 1965, Newtonian Studies , The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Lehtinen, A.A.: 1991, ‘Northern Natures. A Study of the Forest Question Emerging within the Timber-line Conflict in Finland’, Fennia 169 , 57–169.

Leiss, W.: 1974, The Domination of Nature , Beacon Press, Boston.

Levins, R.: 1998, ‘The Internal and External in Explanatory Theories’, Science as Culture 7 , 557–582.

Levins, R. and Lewontin, R.: 1985, The Dialectical Biologist , Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

Lovejoy, A.O.: 1936, The Great Chain of Being. A Study of the History of an Idea , Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

Lovejoy, A.O.: 1936, Essays in the History of Ideas , Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.

Lyotard, J-F.: 1984, The Postmodern Condition , Manchester University Press, Manchester.

MacIntyre, A.: 1985, After Virtue. A Study in Moral Theory , 2nd ed., Duckworth, London.

Mandelbaum, M.: 1971, History, Man & Reasaon. A Study in Nineteenth-Century Thought , Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.

Marcuse, H.: 1988, Negations. Essays in Critical Theory , Free Associations Books, London.

McGinn, C.: 1991, The Problem of Consciousness , Blackwell, Oxford.

McGrane, B.: 1989, Beyond Anthropology. Society and the Other , Columbia University Press, New York.

Merchant, C.: 1989, Ecological Revolutions. Nature, Gender, and Science in New England , The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC.

Merchant, C.: 1990, The Death of Nature. Women, Ecology and the Scientific Revolution , 2nd ed., Harper & Row, San Francisco.

Merchant, C.: 1992, Radical Ecology. The Search for a Livable World , Routledge, New York.

Mitman, G.: 1992, The State of Nature. Ecology, Community, and American Social Thought, 1900-1950 , University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Oyama, S.: 1991, ‘The Conceptualization of Nature. Nature as Design’, in N.J. Thompson (ed.), Gaia 2: The New Science of Becoming , Lindisfarne Press, Hudson, NY, pp. 171–184.

Passmore, J.: 1980, Man ’s Responsibility for Nature. Ecological Problems and Western Traditions, Duckworth, London.

Pickering, A. (ed.): 1992, Science as Practice and Culture , Chicago University Press, Chicago.

Plumwood, V.: 1993, Feminism and the Mastery of Nature , Routledge, London.

Polanyi, K.: 1944, The Great Transformation. The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time , Rinehart & Co, New York.

Smith, N.: 1984, Uneven Development. Nature, Capital and the Production of Space , Basil Blackwell, Oxford.

Taylor, P.J.: 1992, ‘Re/constructing Socio-ecologies: System Dynamics Modeling of Nomadic Pastoralists in Sub-Saharan Africa’, in A. Clarke and J. Fujimura (eds.), The Right Tools for the Job: At Work in the Twentieth Century Life Sciences , Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, pp. 115–148.

Taylor, P.J.: 1997, ‘“Appearance Notwithstanding, We Are All Doing Something Like Political Ecology”’, Social Epistemology 11 , 111–127.

Taylor, P.J.: 1999, ‘Inseparable and Distributed Complexity: Three Projects for Mapping and Negotiating Socio-natural Processes’, in F. Fischer and M. Hajer (eds.), Living with Nature , Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Taylor, P.J. and García-Barrios, R.: 1997, ‘Dynamics and Rhetorics of Socioenvironmental Change: Critical Perspectives on the Limits of Neo-Malthusian Environmentalism’, Advances in Human Ecology 6 , 257–292.

Taylor, R.J.: 1984, Predation , Chapman and Hall, London.

Vogel, S.: 1996, Against Nature. The Concept of Nature in Critical Theory , State University of New York Press, New York.

White, L.: 1967, ‘The Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis’, Science 155 , 3767–3772.

Williams, R.: 1980, ‘Ideas of Nature’, in his Problems in Materialism and Culture, Verso, London, pp. 67–85.

Williams, R.: 1983, Keywords. A Vocabulary of Culture and Society , 2nd ed., Fontana, London.

Wolf, E.R.: 1982, Europe and the People without History , University of California Press, Berkeley.

Young, R.M.: 1985, Darwin ’s Metaphor. Nature’s Place in Victorian Culture, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Regional Studies and Environmental Policy, University of Tampere, PO Box 607, 33101, Tampere, Finland

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Haila, Y. Beyond the Nature-Culture Dualism. Biology & Philosophy 15 , 155–175 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006625830102

Download citation

Published : 30 March 2014

Issue Date : March 2000

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006625830102

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• ecosocial analysis
• environmental philosophy
• environmentalism
• nature-culture dualism
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History Essays

Nature in chinese culture.

Wine pouring vessel (Gong)

Night-Shining White

Attributed to Dong Yuan

Finches and bamboo

Emperor Huizong

Scholar viewing a waterfall

Service with Decoration of Flowers and Birds

Landscapes after old masters

• Dong Qichang

Windblown bamboo

Brush holder with “Ode to the Pavilion of the Inebriated Old Man”

• Zhang Xihuang

Grazing Horse

Stately Pines on Mount Hua

Department of Asian Art , The Metropolitan Museum of Art

October 2004

In no other cultural tradition has nature played a more important role in the arts than in that of China. Since China’s earliest dynastic period, real and imagined creatures of the earth—serpents, bovines, cicadas, and dragons —were endowed with special attributes, as revealed by their depiction on ritual bronze vessels . In the Chinese imagination, mountains were also imbued since ancient times with sacred power as manifestations of nature’s vital energy ( qi ). They not only attracted the rain clouds that watered the farmer’s crops, they also concealed medicinal herbs, magical fruits, and alchemical minerals that held the promise of longevity . Mountains pierced by caves and grottoes were viewed as gateways to other realms—”cave heavens” ( dongtian ) leading to Daoist paradises where aging is arrested and inhabitants live in harmony.

From the early centuries of the Common Era, men wandered in the mountains not only in quest of immortality but to purify the spirit and find renewal. Daoist and Buddhist holy men gravitated to sacred mountains to build meditation huts and establish temples. They were followed by pilgrims, travelers, and sightseers: poets who celebrated nature’s beauty , city dwellers who built country estates to escape the dust and pestilence of crowded urban centers, and, during periods of political turmoil, officials and courtiers who retreated to the mountains as places of refuge.

Early Chinese philosophical and historical texts contain sophisticated conceptions of the nature of the cosmos. These ideas predate the formal development of the native belief systems of Daoism and Confucianism, and, as part of the foundation of Chinese culture, they were incorporated into the fundamental tenets of these two philosophies. Similarly, these ideas strongly influenced Buddhism when it arrived in China around the first century A.D. Therefore, the ideas about nature described below, as well as their manifestation in Chinese gardens , are consistent with all three belief systems.

The natural world has long been conceived in Chinese thought as a self-generating, complex arrangement of elements that are continuously changing and interacting. Uniting these disparate elements is the Dao, or the Way. Dao is the dominant principle by which all things exist, but it is not understood as a causal or governing force. Chinese philosophy tends to focus on the relationships between the various elements in nature rather than on what makes or controls them. According to Daoist beliefs, man is a crucial component of the natural world and is advised to follow the flow of nature’s rhythms. Daoism also teaches that people should maintain a close relationship with nature for optimal moral and physical health.

Within this structure, each part of the universe is made up of complementary aspects known as yin and yang. Yin, which can be described as passive, dark, secretive, negative, weak, feminine, and cool, and yang, which is active, bright, revealed, positive, masculine, and hot, constantly interact and shift from one extreme to the other, giving rise to the rhythm of nature and unending change.

As early as the Han dynasty , mountains figured prominently in the arts. Han incense burners typically resemble mountain peaks, with perforations concealed amid the clefts to emit incense, like grottoes disgorging magical vapors. Han mirrors are often decorated with either a diagram of the cosmos featuring a large central boss that recalls Mount Kunlun, the mythical abode of the Queen Mother of the West and the axis of the cosmos, or an image of the Queen Mother of the West enthroned on a mountain. While they never lost their cosmic symbolism or association with paradises inhabited by numinous beings, mountains gradually became a more familiar part of the scenery in depictions of hunting parks, ritual processions, temples, palaces, and gardens. By the late Tang dynasty , landscape painting had evolved into an independent genre that embodied the universal longing of cultivated men to escape their quotidian world to commune with nature. The prominence of landscape imagery in Chinese art has continued for more than a millennium and still inspires contemporary artists .

Department of Asian Art. “Nature in Chinese Culture.” In Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History . New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2000–. http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/cnat/hd_cnat.htm (October 2004)

Further Reading

Clunas, Craig. Art in China . Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.

Fong, Wen C., et al. Possessing the Past: Treasures from the National Palace Museum, Taipei . New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1996. See on MetPublications

Hearn, Maxwell K. How to Read Chinese Paintings . New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2008. See on MetPublications

Sullivan, Michael. The Arts of China . Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984.

Additional Essays by Department of Asian Art

• Department of Asian Art. “ Mauryan Empire (ca. 323–185 B.C.) .” (October 2000)
• Department of Asian Art. “ Zen Buddhism .” (October 2002)
• Department of Asian Art. “ Chinese Cloisonné .” (October 2004)
• Department of Asian Art. “ Chinese Gardens and Collectors’ Rocks .” (October 2004)
• Department of Asian Art. “ Landscape Painting in Chinese Art .” (October 2004)
• Department of Asian Art. “ Han Dynasty (206 B.C.–220 A.D.) .” (October 2000)
• Department of Asian Art. “ Kushan Empire (ca. Second Century B.C.–Third Century A.D.) .” (October 2000)
• Department of Asian Art. “ Qin Dynasty (221–206 B.C.) .” (October 2000)
• Department of Asian Art. “ Rinpa Painting Style .” (October 2003)
• Department of Asian Art. “ Jōmon Culture (ca. 10,500–ca. 300 B.C.) .” (October 2002)
• Department of Asian Art. “ The Kano School of Painting .” (October 2003)
• Department of Asian Art. “ Woodblock Prints in the Ukiyo-e Style .” (October 2003)
• Department of Asian Art. “ Traditional Chinese Painting in the Twentieth Century .” (October 2004)
• Department of Asian Art. “ Ming Dynasty (1368–1644) .” (October 2002)
• Department of Asian Art. “ Northern Song Dynasty (960–1127) .” (October 2001)
• Department of Asian Art. “ Period of the Northern and Southern Dynasties (386–581) .” (October 2002)
• Department of Asian Art. “ Southern Song Dynasty (1127–1279) .” (October 2001)
• Department of Asian Art. “ Tang Dynasty (618–907) .” (October 2001)
• Department of Asian Art. “ Yayoi Culture (ca. 300 B.C.–300 A.D.) .” (October 2002)
• Department of Asian Art. “ Yuan Dynasty (1271–1368) .” (October 2001)
• Department of Asian Art. “ Art of the Pleasure Quarters and the Ukiyo-e Style .” (October 2004)
• Department of Asian Art. “ Scholar-Officials of China .” (October 2004)
• Department of Asian Art. “ Kofun Period (ca. 300–710) .” (October 2002)
• Department of Asian Art. “ Shunga Dynasty (ca. Second–First Century B.C.) .” (October 2000)
• Department of Asian Art. “ Lacquerware of East Asia .” (October 2004)
• Department of Asian Art. “ Painting Formats in East Asian Art .” (October 2004)
• Department of Asian Art. “ Asuka and Nara Periods (538–794) .” (October 2002)
• Department of Asian Art. “ Heian Period (794–1185) .” (October 2002)
• Department of Asian Art. “ Kamakura and Nanbokucho Periods (1185–1392) .” (October 2002)
• Department of Asian Art. “ Momoyama Period (1573–1615) .” (October 2002)
• Department of Asian Art. “ Neolithic Period in China .” (October 2004)
• Department of Asian Art. “ Muromachi Period (1392–1573) .” (October 2002)
• Department of Asian Art. “ Samurai .” (October 2002)
• Department of Asian Art. “ Shinto .” (October 2002)
• Department of Asian Art. “ Seasonal Imagery in Japanese Art .” (October 2004)
• Department of Asian Art. “ Shang and Zhou Dynasties: The Bronze Age of China .” (October 2004)
• Department of Asian Art. “ Shōguns and Art .” (October 2004)
• Department of Asian Art. “ Art of the Edo Period (1615–1868) .” (October 2003)

Related Essays

• Chinese Gardens and Collectors’ Rocks
• Landscape Painting in Chinese Art
• Longevity in Chinese Art
• Scholar-Officials of China
• Traditional Chinese Painting in the Twentieth Century
• Chinese Calligraphy
• Chinese Cloisonné
• Chinese Handscrolls
• Chinese Hardstone Carvings
• Chinese Painting
• Daoism and Daoist Art
• East Asian Cultural Exchange in Tiger and Dragon Paintings
• Han Dynasty (206 B.C.–220 A.D.)
• The Japanese Tea Ceremony
• Ming Dynasty (1368–1644)
• Mountain and Water: Korean Landscape Painting, 1400–1800
• Music and Art of China
• Painting Formats in East Asian Art
• The Qing Dynasty (1644–1911): Painting
• Seasonal Imagery in Japanese Art
• Shang and Zhou Dynasties: The Bronze Age of China
• Southern Song Dynasty (1127–1279)
• Tang Dynasty (618–907)
• The Vibrant Role of Mingqi in Early Chinese Burials
• Wang Hui (1632–1717)
• Yuan Dynasty (1271–1368)
• Zen Buddhism
• China, 1000 B.C.–1 A.D.
• China, 1000–1400 A.D.
• China, 1400–1600 A.D.
• China, 1–500 A.D.
• China, 1600–1800 A.D.
• China, 1800–1900 A.D.
• China, 1900 A.D.–present
• China, 2000–1000 B.C.
• China, 500–1000 A.D.
• Calligraphy
• Han Dynasty
• Immortality
• Incense Burner
• Religious Art
• Southern Song Dynasty
• Tang Dynasty
• Yuan Dynasty

Artist or Maker

Online features.

• 82nd & Fifth: “Dream Logic” by Joseph Scheier-Dolberg
• 82nd & Fifth: “Eternity” by Maxwell K. Hearn
• 82nd & Fifth: “Metaphorical” by Shi-yee Liu

Essay on African Culture

Students are often asked to write an essay on African Culture in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on African Culture

African culture: an overview.

African culture is vast and diverse. It is not just one culture, but many. There are 54 countries in Africa, each with its own unique traditions, languages, music, and art. This makes African culture rich and varied.

In Africa, over 2000 languages are spoken. These include Swahili, Amharic, Yoruba, and Zulu. Each language tells a story about the people who speak it. It shows their history, their beliefs, and their way of life.

Art and Craft

African art is famous for its bold colors and unique designs. It includes masks, sculptures, paintings, and textiles. Each piece of art tells a story or represents a belief.

Music and Dance

Music and dance are important in African culture. They are used to celebrate, to tell stories, and to honor ancestors. Instruments like drums, xylophones, and the kora are often used.

African food varies by region. In North Africa, you will find dishes with couscous and spices. In West Africa, dishes often include rice, yams, and fish. Each dish reflects the local environment.

Religion and Beliefs

Religion is a big part of African culture. Many people follow Christianity or Islam. Others follow traditional African religions. These often involve respect for ancestors and nature.

African clothing is colorful and varied. It often features bright colors and bold patterns. It can also show a person’s status or role in society.

In conclusion, African culture is rich and diverse. It is a blend of many different traditions, beliefs, and practices.

250 Words Essay on African Culture

Introduction to african culture.

Africa is a large continent with many different people and cultures. Each group has its own unique way of life, but there are some things that they all share.

African art is famous around the world. It is very colorful and often tells a story. People use different materials like wood, bronze, and clay to make sculptures and masks. They also make beautiful jewelry and clothes using beads and shells.

Music and dance are very important in African culture. They are used to celebrate, to tell stories, and to show respect to elders. African music uses many different instruments like drums, bells, and flutes. The dances are often very energetic and involve a lot of movement.

Food and Cuisine

African food is tasty and diverse. In many places, people eat a lot of grains, vegetables, and meat. They also use many different spices to give their food a unique flavor. Some popular dishes include jollof rice, couscous, and injera.

Traditional Clothing

In Africa, traditional clothing is often bright and colorful. Many people wear clothes made from fabrics like kente cloth and mud cloth. These clothes are often decorated with beautiful patterns and designs.

African culture is rich and diverse. It is full of beautiful art, music, food, and clothing. It is a culture that values community, respect for elders, and celebration. It is a culture that should be respected and appreciated by all.

500 Words Essay on African Culture

African culture is rich and varied, just like the continent itself. Africa is the second largest continent in the world, and it is home to many different countries, each with its own unique culture. When we talk about African culture, we are talking about the traditions, languages, art, music, and social habits of these different countries.

Traditions and Customs

One of the most important parts of African culture is its traditions and customs. These are the ways of life that have been passed down from generation to generation. In many African societies, elders are highly respected, and their wisdom is valued. Storytelling is also a big part of African culture. Through stories, important lessons and history are shared.

Language is another key aspect of African culture. There are over 2000 distinct languages spoken across the continent. Some of the most widely spoken languages include Swahili, Amharic, Yoruba, and Zulu. Each language is unique and reflects the culture of the people who speak it.

Art and Music

Art and music are central to African culture. African art is diverse and includes sculptures, paintings, pottery, and textiles. It often tells a story or represents spiritual beliefs. African music is also diverse and varies from region to region. It plays a key role in celebrations, ceremonies, and storytelling.

Social Habits

African societies value community and family. Many African cultures believe in the concept of “Ubuntu”, a Zulu term meaning “I am because we are”. This philosophy emphasizes the importance of community and caring for each other.

Food in African culture is more than just sustenance. It is a way to bring people together. African cuisine varies greatly across the continent. North African food, for example, is influenced by Arabic culture, while West African food is known for its bold flavors and hearty stews.

In conclusion, African culture is a vibrant and diverse tapestry of traditions, languages, art, music, social habits, and food. It is a culture that values community, respect for elders, and the sharing of stories. By learning about African culture, we can gain a deeper understanding of the richness and diversity of the human experience. Remember, Africa is not a single country, but a continent with many unique cultures. Each one has its own beauty and value, contributing to the rich tapestry that is African culture.

That’s it! I hope the essay helped you.

If you’re looking for more, here are essays on other interesting topics:

• Essay on African American
• Essay on Afghanistan
• Essay on Advertisement Boon Or Bane

Apart from these, you can look at all the essays by clicking here .

Happy studying!

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Books Received
• Published: 20 June 1907

The Evolution of Culture and other Essays

• A. E. CRAWLEY  

Nature volume  76 ,  page 169 ( 1907 ) Cite this article

170 Accesses

Metrics details

“IN language and in all ideas communicated by word of mouth there is a hiatus between the limits of our knowledge and the origin of culture which can never be bridged over, but we may hold in our hand the first tool ever created by the hand of man”(p.131)

The Evolution of Culture and other Essays.

Lieut.—General A. Lane-Fox Pitt-Rivers J. L. Myres, with an introduction by Henry Balfour. Pp. xx + 232; twenty-one plates. (Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1906.) Price 7 s . 6 d . net.

Article PDF

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

CRAWLEY, A. The Evolution of Culture and other Essays . Nature 76 , 169 (1907). https://doi.org/10.1038/076169a0

Download citation

Issue Date : 20 June 1907

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/076169a0

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.