A first function of reason is to provide tools for the kind of rich and versatile coordination that human cooperation requires.

– The Enigma of Reason, Sperber and Mercier

Research has shown that cognition and reasoning styles differ across cultures.

– Is It Culture or Is It Language? Examination of Language Effects in Cross-Cultural Research on Categorization

In Andrea Phillips’ Three Laws, Mr Won of Won Consortium International, is killed by Iris, a top of the line robot, described as “sentient” by Doctor Susan Hobbes, who was summoned by the Emergent Robotic Behaviours Division of American Robotics Corp to investigate, the “murder”.

When Doctor Hobbes quizzes Iris on the first law of robotics to ascertain if there has been some malfunction, Iris replies with aplomb, “I must not harm my owner, or through inaction allow my owner to be harmed” and even attempts to persuade her interrogator by saying, “I haven’t forgotten the laws, Doctor Hobbes. And you’ll find that I haven’t broken them, either”. As it turned out, not only had Iris not broken the law, she in fact, had to kill Mr Won to remain in compliance with it.

Having convinced Doctor Hobbes, with reason she, as agent of the prosecutorial function, would find compelling, Iris gets away with murder, literally and legally.

Reason is almost always little more than ex post facto rationalization, according to the authors, Dan Sperber and Hugo Mercier, unless cited by a programmed intelligent entity like Iris. They argue that humans function on intuition and not reason and suggest that reason is used only as a means to secure cooperation from others, through argumentation and justification. This article submits the view, that this is reason enough to master the art or science of reasoning. Regardless of the role reason plays in determining human actions, it is legal tender and good currency to satisfy trust deficits in groups or at the very least, manufacture consensus or consent even without trust. Indeed, the latter is the stuff of sophistry. This is not to say, that all who employ reason engage in sophistry. It is important to be reasonable in conduct; society depends on it. Ultimately, the proof of the pudding is in the eating.

A reasonable person must accept a reasonable view. When in collaboration with others, disputes are often settled with reason; the best reason prevails. The best reason will be the one which appeals to the agreed upon highest good or objective pursued by a group such as shareholder or stakeholder value in firms. Alternatively, to convince members of a group to choose one course of action over another, one has to offer a reason which appeals to the shared values of the group or the value system of the most influential voice in the group. This might be a relatively straightforward exercise in homogeneous groupings and becomes slightly more complex in culturally heterogeneous groupings.

It has been found that culture determines reasoning styles. To confirm this, experiments were conducted with a sample of participants from markedly different cultures. They were asked to group 3 words, such as ‘squirrel’, ‘monkey’ and ‘bananas’. Participants of one culture chose to group the squirrel and monkey together, because they belonged in the same category. Participants of another culture though chose to group ‘monkey’ and ‘bananas’, because the monkey and bananas were related by virtue of circumstance. Participants in different cultures were consistent in the way they grouped different sets of 3 items, such that it appeared a clear conclusion that one culture was more categorical and the other more relational. To control for differences in language, that is, to remove the effect of language on choice such that only cultural effects were at play, participants were tested in the same language.

When working in cross-cultural teams or on transnational collaboration, it cannot be assumed that counterparts subscribe to the same value systems. Cross-cultural awareness becomes necessary to see the world through the eyes of others. This will especially be the case in transnational collaboration when one firm enjoys less bargaining power in relation to partners. In such a situation, understanding what would be compelling reason to the more influential, would help shape a more equitable, even favourable outcome.

While international schools may be culturally heterogeneous in make-up, to the extent that instruction is based on one language or the other, interactions in such schools have the net effect of localising diverse cultures, rather than forging cross-cultural understanding.

There may be a relatively easy and enjoyable way of acquiring diverse cultural lenses while strengthening English language skills at the same time; a way to promote reading, critical thinking, cross-cultural awareness and even learn a foreign language in the process without the attendant stresses the pursuit of each of the foregoing objectives in isolation and in a formal way, brings.

Netflix. Or something like it. Students get rich and varied pickings from a plethora of curated content from different cultures. The English language learning happens even and especially when watching drama in a foreign language by way of subtitles. To maintain quality control, Netflix dramas in foreign languages are typically subtitled well. Given an engaging enough plot or an appealing enough cast, students might be motivated to access a foreign culture. Since, at least initially, the only way to do this would be to read subtitles, they would be very focused on reading and would acquire new context specific and culturally relevant vocabulary. Many students go beyond merely reading English subtitles to learning the foreign language formally, such as Japanese to watch Anime or Korean to watch K-dramas, for a more immersive experience. This cannot be a bad thing.

There is a distinction between cultural relevance and cultural equivalence as critics of Disney animation productions are quick to point out. The 1998 animated feature film Mulan is a case in point. While Chinese elements such as the dragon sidekick, which dovetailed with Disney’s formula of using animal sidekicks for animated films, were incorporated, critics felt Mushu was more like a lizard than a dragon. When the Disney version was subtitled in Chinese, for the local market, the expression, “A single grain of rice can tip the scale” was translated to “a common soldier can also achieve great military merit” to be more aligned with local values (Xu & Tian, 2013) – collectivism vs individualism.

While there is risk of meaning being lost in translation when accessing foreign cultures in subtitles of one’s own language, subtitles serve as first port of call for cross-cultural access. It is of course open to viewers to investigate further if translations are faithful to the original – this process promotes critical thinking. Students could also watch dramas in their mother tongue and evaluate quality of English subtitles and where they think, the subtitles fail, they could think of more representative formulations. All this could happen quite naturally and effortlessly because the medium is in the entertainment domain.

Knowing Ava could have saved Mr Won from Iris.

The Brain Dojo