Narayan's argument is stronger and more valid than Rushdie's Essay

Narayan's argument is stronger and more valid than Rushdie's - Essay Example While, Narayan’s argument is based on the premise that the writers who are no longer a part of their homelands, tend to lose their cultural identity and tend to become â€Å"cultural† orphans. However, the view point of Rushdie is tangentially different and emphasizes on the other extreme. This one is based on the fact that the writers attain a broader understanding of culture. Having carefully seen both the arguments, let us try to analyze the basis of these arguments. In order to understand the basis of these arguments, it is vital to comprehend the meaning of culture. Culture has a lot of dimensions, which have a residual impact on the functional element of the basic understanding of one’s surroundings. Fundamental premise Culture has a number of definitions that is used across contexts. However, the primary definition of culture can be seen as a pattern of shared behaviors and their interactions, the use of cognitive kind of constructs, and the effective kind of understanding that is learned through the process of socialization. It also consists of s shared set of customs, norms and beliefs. The culture is not a singular entity and may have other kinds of dimensions as well (Andrew 96). This may comprise of a definitive culture being present in one part of a country and the absence in another. Together, they form a part of the common understanding of culture. From the point of view of the debate at hand and the two contrasting opinions, we can draw up a form of comprehension of different kinds of factors that can be used to explain all of these. Now, let us take each of the points and understand the factors that shall be helpful in defining the context of this discussion. Narayan has mentioned about the fact that the individuals who live away from the homeland tend to suffer from a cultural disconnect. Let us comprehend the definition of culture in a more refined manner and de-construct the argument. The definition of culture shall help in explaining the finer points of this argument. Culture is an amalgam of shared patterns. This implies that the formation of the initial belief structure is fomented by the exposure to indigenous culture. But, for any individual living in foreign land or an adopted country, the patterns of shared behavior tend to become diffused in nature. There is an enforced behavior that gains prominence when compared to the generic behavior. The cultural patterns of shared behavior in any country are different from the others leading to a change in the perception. Each culture has a distinctive style of imparting a means of understanding the needs of a society. It channelizes the different forms of behavior in humans as a part of the society. The levels of cognition are varied according to the learning as different parts of the society. This forms an essential degree of difference among the various elements. The cognitive understanding of culture varies among different countries. So, in case o f any individual has lived away from their homeland or their ancestral land, they tend to develop a dissociated sense of cognitive construct (Keleman 233). According to Parsons, the social construct of any individual consists of the following components. They are as follows- The process of biological needs that are defined by the behavioral system of any culture or place. The â€Å"personality system†