Hacker News Reader

Comment by robotcookies | Hacker News Reader

I think Gladwell makes some good points and that cultural factors can play a role in these things.

But I can't help but wonder if these same cultural factors can go both ways and maybe we're obsessively focusing on just one effect. For example, it might be that deference to hierarchy and older people leads to children taking responsibility and care of their parents in old age more. It might even be that the elderly in these places live longer and more happier lives as a result and that this outweighs the (still tragic but rare) plane accident.

It reminds me a bit of the terrorism situation in the US. We obsess over these things which are relatively rare and spend great effort to eliminate. But what are we losing in the process?

View on HN

What a pros-and-cons evaluation of a culture misses is that cultures are "self-modifying code", with the weakest attributes constantly being revised. Few cultures are modernising as quickly as Korean. After all, Korean Air decided that Korean Air had a problem.

Where this process of introspection and change falls down is with expats and their children, who have detailed knowledge of and an exaggerated respect for the culture they left behind but are unable to play a role in changing it. Culture becomes a museum exhibit to these people. (I would be surprised if 'The Korean' lives in Korea.) As someone who knows lots of Koreans but few Korean Americans, I can say that after a few bottles of soju and speaking their native language, nobody is more aware of and passionate about resolving the problems in their own culture than a Korean.

But no one is talking about whether or not Korean culture is superior or inferior in general, we're talking about whether it's optimal for the very specific situation of airline cockpit communications when the more senior pilot has made an error in judgement.

Let's say a country had a higher than average rate of infant mortality. Let's also say that it was speculated the cause was cultural... due to parents in this imaginary country allowing their babies to sleep in their beds. And although very rare, a story gets out in the news about a baby that suffocates in bed. Thousands of articles come out speculating about how this cultural habit is killing innocent babies.

Let's also say that it turns out babies that sleep in bed with their parents turn out to have a higher survival rate that those that don't, after the first year. These babies do better in school, have much lower suicide rates as teens and are happier in their life. Maybe a higher percent actually make to adulthood than the ones who sleep in cribs even accounting for the rare suffocations.

What would you think if the media ONLY discussed the rare infant deaths and not the other effects? Don't you think it would be a bit unfair and biased? You could even argue it might be harmful.

BTW, the example above is made up and I'm not claiming anything about parenting or Korean culture, good or bad. I'm just saying the media and public usually only look at horrific deaths and ignore everything else. This applies to terrorism, plane accidents, roller coasters, etc.

I'm sure if you wanted to find examples of systematic bias in the media and public perception you wouldn't have to look far.

But (for once) we're not talking about that. Gladwell based his chapter largely on the conclusions of official investigations.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com