Squeersy

//For me culture is far more a hindrance than a help-mate in characterising phenomena//

Mate.. you've been reading wayyyyyy too much Marx and Engles and Marcuse ..... take a deep breath.

"Culture" is what is... and "characterizing phenomena"...what the ? ? ?

For crying out loud.. get out more. Go tribal for a few weeks.... I recommend the Dayaks of Borneo..they'll sort out your idea of culture.

Your comment even betrays your own 'culture' where you assume that there is a non 'cultural' way of characterizing reality/phenomena...

Ideology is the one, that is the modern day culture.
The idea is to get blind drunk start a fight or two , piss on some ones window or door way, get a taxi ,spew all over the inside of the car, and when the driver grabs you by the ear to get you out of his car, you screem asault.

Dear Squeers,

Some people would say culture does not exist. I might agree with them. Others might say it does exist. Again I could agree. The term is used loosely and difinitively. Some aspects are objective and many others sujective. Mosaic tiles are said to be charactistic of high Roman first century high society... Both the Chinese and Anglo-Europeans used ploughs in the eleventh century yet because the English ploughs took eight oxen to pull it. Here, the ecology causes serfs to develop horizonal altruism for mutual survival: On the other hand, the Chinese farmers (not serfs) of that period were highly familial and competitive and uncooperative,owing largely to mobility and soft soil. Thus, we have the intermeashing of the objective and subjective in a rather haphazard manner, yet decernible trends can measured, even mathematically.

Will check back in a few days.