The geography of thought Ch.1

Today I found I was a really slow reader and I couldn't understand the book so much. Meiland's essay taught me how to really understand reading, but saying is one thing, doing another.

In ch.1 Nisbett compares the Greek and the Chinese. They had very different view and the reasons he mentioned were persuasive. Particularly some of the characteristics of the ancient Chinese which he mentioned mirrors the Japanese character(ex. harmony is the priority, they thinks themselves a part of large organism, they don't debate so much), which is not surprising but funny.
The Greeks are better in science but worse in causality than the Chinese, and vise versa. That is also interesting and I learned a lot of new things through the analysis on their technological development.
However, I wondered why Chinese and Greeks(Some students also mentioned though).
The title of this book is how asian and westerners think differently, but Asian is not equal to China, also Westerners is not equal to the Greeks. I said above that the ancient Chinese view was similar to Japanese one, but it doens't mean everything is same. Every country has different position and point of view. Nisbett cannot sum up them into only 2 points.
Moreover, the modern society tends to focus on each individual. We cannot make a sweeping judgement about their perception.