2018-05-10

Does every reference to group characteristics constitute a stereotype?

No. Recurring patterns of thinking and acting are observable in groups, and references to those patterns are therefore legitimate. In ancient times the Chinese were more creative than most other peoples; in the late nineteenth century and much of the twentieth, German industrial technology led the world; in recent decades the Japanese have demonstrated remarkable inventiveness and concern for quality. Furthermore, not all cultural patterns are complimentary. For centuries the Spanish and Portuguese disdained manual labor, thinking it a sign of dishonor, and emigrants to Latin America carried that attitude with them. Today Sri Lankans have a similar attitude.The prevalence of this attitude in these societies can be acknowledged without suggesting that all Hispanics and Sri Lankans are lazy. (Incidentally, the belief that manual labor is dishonorablereflects illogical reasoning rather than indolence.) As Thomas Sowell points out, the acknowledgment and examination of all cultural patterns, desirable and undesirable, advantageous and disadvantageous, is essential to understanding the success and failure

of groups, nations, and entire civilizations.

提及团体的特征是否构成陈规旧见？不是。反复出现的思维和行为在群体是可观察的，并且提及这些模式所以是合理的。古代中国比大部分人都更具创造了；在19世纪晚期和20世纪的大部分时间。德国工业技术领先世界；在最近十年日本人被证明异常有创造性并且关心质量。更多的，不是所有文化模式都是值得夸耀的。几个世纪来西班牙人和葡萄牙人鄙视体力劳动，认为它是耻辱的标志，并且移民到拉丁美洲的人也持有相似的态度。现在斯里兰卡人也有相似的态度。流行于在这些社会的态度也可能被承认，而不被建议所有的西班牙和葡萄牙人和斯里兰卡人都是懒惰的。（顺便说，关于体力劳动是耻辱的这种想法反映出不合逻辑的推理而不是懒惰。）正如托马斯·斯维尔指出的，这个对所有文化模式承认和考察，令人满意的或不令人满意的，有利的或不利的，都必须的理解群体，国家，和整个文化圈的成功和失败。