Topic: "To truly understand your own culture—no matter how you define it—requires personal knowledge of at least one other culture, one that is distinctly different from your own."
First, I point out culture has its uniqueness and identity, and it was developed in an environment different from others, so knowledge about other culture to understand one culture may be unnecessary.
Second, I argue that during the development of culture, it might be mixed with others. For example, China's Confucianism had great impact on culture of japan and Korea. Thus, To truly understand Japanese and Korean culture, people need to know Confucianism too.
Third, I further argue with modernization and globalization, one culture penetrates or assimilates others; thus nowadays, many culture are disturbed. For example, America today is named "big culture melting pot". Without knowing other culture, it would be very difficult to understand American modern culture.
I was trying to analyzing it. If my argument is okay? Thank you.
Top answer
I think you have drifted away from what is being asked. The question is: Is it possible to understand your own culture without knowing at least one different culture? What you need to approach is how a foreign culture can help you understand how your own system really works.
— Mister Micawber
Free · every Monday
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
I think you have drifted away from what is being asked. The question is: Is it possible to understand your own culture without knowing at least one different culture?
What you need to approach is how a foreign culture can help you understand how your own system really works. Most of us take for granted the way our own system works-- that it is the only 'right'
First, your argument structure is to be very clear. When you say "so knowledge about other culture to understand one culture may be unnecessary" you contradict the thesis of the essay. Perhaps this is a typo? The first argument contradicts the other two. First you talk about "uniqueness and identity", then about cultures "mixed", and then finally about merging of cultures. The whole line