This reflection covers takeaways from our fourth themed seminar titled “When in Rome…” Though our discussion was cut short before wrapping up completely, the session remained an incredibly rewarding experience.
We kicked off the debate with the opening prompt: “What culture have you encountered that struck you as surprising or difficult to comprehend, and how did you respond?” Several participants shared observations revolving around Islamic culture, focusing specifically on the headscarves worn by Muslim women. Following these exchanges, Dr. T posed a thought-provoking follow-up: ought we to respect cultural practices that appear problematic, and is there merit in pushing for their reform? Our group concluded that the feasibility of altering an established culture hinges largely on one’s social standing and legal entitlements; ordinary individuals generally lack the power to reshape entrenched cultural norms single-handedly.
The second core discussion question read, “Do you expect immigrant populations to fully assimilate into your native culture?” Our collective stance framed cultural integration as a reciprocal process built on mutual respect and compromise, rather than one-sided forced assimilation. None of us advocate for requiring immigrants to abandon their unique cultural identities entirely to conform to local customs. Instead, newcomers ought to preserve their heritage—including native languages, traditional festivals, cuisines, familial ethics, and long-standing cultural rituals. In turn, societies thrive when embracing multiculturalism, blending diverse cultural backgrounds into a cohesive community.
Our third talking point explored “Who establishes societal rules: governing bodies or ordinary citizens?” Governments codify formal, legally binding regulations such as statutes and public administrative policies. By contrast, communities shape unwritten codes rooted in folk customs, inherited traditions and shared moral norms. These two sets of rules continuously interact with and influence one another in practice.
Regrettably, the seminar was suspended midway and could not reach a formal conclusion. Even so, it proved immensely valuable, sparking in-depth deliberations over cross-cultural respect and the ethics of cultural reform.
The seminar was smoothly coordinated by leaders Eric and Rhett. They structured the progression of discussion prompts and contributed their personal insights to each topic under review. They also guided dialogue excellently: by calling on attendees in alternating left-to-right and right-to-left order, every student secured an opportunity to voice their thoughts, keeping the discussion orderly and avoiding unruly chaos throughout the session.