The Geography of Thought: How Asians and Westerners Think Differently...and Why

Every educated Asian I know (who has read this book) has given this book high marks. While a number of Anglo Americans I know have given this book mixed marks and at times (as with some of the reviewers here) have challenged the premise that there are cultural aspects to how we think. In the field of anthropology, this kind of Anglo skepticism has a technical term "naive realism." Nisbett challenges his own self-admitted naive realism to see the possibility of radically different worldviews underlying East and West cultures. What is unique about the author's approach however is that rather than using the tools of Anthropology, he has utilized psychology... For many people (like myself) who have trouble with the language of Anthropology, and prefer quanitifiable studies - this book is a breath of fresh air and a ray of light on the murky question of culture! Now if Nisbett would do a similar work focusing on Arab and Anglo worldviews...

Are there basic differences in thought processes between the Chinese-Confucian societies of East Asia and Western societies? The author answers "yes" and makes a compelling case. Nisbett's thesis is that there is no universal human cognition - all cognition is culturally affected. Through the use of numerous psychological studies he shows a stark difference in the way Westerners and East Asians perceive, reason, and "see" the world. Nisbett begins by tracing the origins of Western and East Asian philosophy, science and society. On this foundation he builds a case that Western and East Asian cognition is very different. He completes the book with two chapters on the implications of such differences to our modern world. After 15 years living and working in 3 countries in Asia I can say that there are fundamental differences in the way people from different cultures process, evaluate, and act on information. Everyone views the world through cultural "glasses," and the glasses are all different. Being aware of your own glasses and the glasses of others is a beginning to cross-cultural understanding. My Japanese colleague has stopped trying to explain to Americans the way Japanese people think - now he just lets Nisbett's book do it. This book provides important research foundations for trainers and coaches who work cross-culturally in Asia.

Nisbett's book is the popular presentation of a decade-long (at least) revolution occuring in cultural psychology and anthropology. Essentially he tries to explain that the way that people think isn't just a standard "thought process" with different cultural definitions provided depending on where you grow up but that the process of growing up and absorbing the meanings and values provided by the cultural environment critcally and fundamentally shape how one thinks. People literally SEE the world differently. It isn't just language or concepts or values or customs.I've been doing research as an anthropologist and studying cultural psychology here in Japan for the last 5 years. This change in conception of how culture creates cultured people (and then cultured people create culture in turn) is truly wonderful, as it provides a systematic way of understanding the human condition. We all know that we are social, cultural creatures (see Tomasello's Cultural Origins of Cognition for a great treatment of this issue as well) but many researchers tend to treat culture as a "thing," an approach that has been recognizably problematic for decades. I found this new understanding of culture and self (it is referred to as "mutual constitution" as in they mutually contribute to the formation of the other) to be slippery though. At times, it makes so much sense and is so powerful for understanding culture that it feels like I'm looking through a microscope at the fundamental human cultural process, but then at other times the seemingly tautological aspect of it spins me around and spits me out like a carousel at high speed. Either it seems to make so much sense that it hardly feels worth mentioning or it makes very little sense. But don't give up on it, as it is the way our cultural species operates.I've been talking generalities thus far, but this book also provides interesting specific information about Eastern and Western cultures, going back to early philosophical foundations and following them forward to see how the thoughts (cultural patterns) formed. Once these patterns form, when they are transmited to a new generation of babies, they become part of the mental substrate of cognition and fundamentally shape how the babies view the world and the elements within it.This is NOT about cognitive science, nor is it incompatible with cognitive science findings. Nisbett and colleagues' research is well founded (check the bibliography) and published widely in peer reviewed journals. This books is intended to present this information without statistical analysis of the performance of different people from different cultures on particular tests or in particualr scenarios.Okay, I've blathered on long enough. Good book, great thesis, essential to understand cultural differences or the nature of cultural animals such as ourselves. Enjoy!

Nisbett has written a fascinating and thought-provoking book about an important topic, which is the differing cognitive styles of people from the West and Asia. Using a large number of social psychological studies as evidence, he shows that there's lots of evidence that Asians (by which he primarily means Chinese and Japanese) have different habits of thoughts than Westerners (meaning basically Americans), differences that are visible in research looking at very basic cognitive processes. Asians are more attentive to context, while Americans are more atomistic and object-focussed; Asians are more willing to anticipate changes in the directions of trends, while Americans tend to think linearly and expect trends to continue. Asians seek compromises to conflicts, while Americans tend to polarize alternatives; more generally, Americans are very used to styles of thinking that are argumentative and syllogistic styles (those involving formal logic), while Asians tend to find them less congenial. Admittedly, there's a danger here of over-generalizations or slipping into stereotypes, but Nisbett's work appears to avoid these problems partly by being based on empirical studies, and by being carefully qualified. And though he can't prove his speculations about the causes of these differences, he offers plausible theories as to why the differing cultural contexts of the two kinds of societies might have favored the different styles of thought. If Nisbett is right and people would take these differences seriously, two very positive consequences could follow. One is that Americans would have to confront the fact that other cultures don't necessarily have to or want to be like us--or even think like us. Our thoughtless assumption that either everyone is just like us, or ought to be, needs to be shaken up and this book does that. The other useful result is that this book encourages us to realize that there are many ways of using the mind to respond to reality. Some people may impatiently ask; but what's the right way? But that misses one of the points of the book: each way of thinking, each cognitive style, works well within a certain cultural context. Nisbett doesn't tackle the big issue of whether Asians would benefit more from thinking in "American" ways or we would benefit from thinking in "Asian" ways. He seems to think that each culture might learn something from the other. This answer is perhaps too speculative and imprecise for some people, but it sounds about right to me. In any case, read the book with an open mind and being aware that it's just one small part of the vast and complex subject of cultural differences in mentalities, and I think you will find it highly rewarding.

This is a very insightful book with lots of information. It is well written and researched. There are many differences between the way Westerners and Easterners think. Some of the points may seem obvious, but they are still interesting to read about. Children who grow up in the East learn verbs faster. In contrast, children in the West pick up nouns faster. This is because Easterners learn the relationships between objects with action words first. Westerners generally just learn what the object is first. Conflict resolution is handled very differently too. The goal in Eastern conflict resolution is to reduce hostility and to reach a compromise. The goal in resolving conflict in the West is having satisfaction that justice was carried out with a clear winner and loser. However as the author suggests Westerners have to begun to embrace a lot of Eastern ideas. There is a greater emphasis in achieving harmony in a person's life in Eastern cultures. Asian people are more self critical of themselves as a result. In contrast, the goal of a Westerner is to achieve a sense of uniqueness and superiority. I also learned that students who study history in the West focus on the implications or outcomes of events first. Asian students study the causes of historical events first. Teacher training and evaluation is a process that never ends in Eastern countries unlike the West where it is short.The Geography of Thought is a very short book, but it should not be read rapidly because of the depth and quantity of information. I have a greater insight and appreciation for the way people think now. I enjoyed it very much.