Seminar Reflection: Foreigners, Locals, and Culture
(btw if ya guys don’t know me, I’m a blogger from OCAC that blogs on literature and our ELL class)
(Also, THE ONLY DAYUM REASON I WRITE THESE IS CUZ OUR TEACHER FORCED ME TO, K?)
(I DO NOT WANT TO WRITE THESE AT ALL GUYS BTW)
This seminar was a bit different for me because I was one of the leaders this time.
The topic was culture, identity, and the classic question of whether you should follow the saying “when in Rome, do as the Romans do.” What surprised me was how much discussion came out of what seemed like a very simple question: what even counts as a local or a foreigner?
One of my favorite parts was a debate I had with Ian about identity. Ian argued that identity is mostly determined by society—it’s about how other people see you. I took the opposite position and argued that identity is mainly about how you see yourself. For example, if someone was born in one country but strongly identifies with another culture, I think their own view matters more. We didn’t exactly convince each other, but it was a really fun discussion. Honestly, these kinds of disagreements are what make seminars enjoyable. If everyone agrees all the time, discussions get boring pretty quickly.
We also talked about whether someone can truly understand a culture without growing up in it, and whether people have a responsibility to change cultural practices if they think doing so would make society better. My biggest takeaway was that you don’t have to agree with every culture, but that doesn’t automatically mean you should try to change it either. Sometimes respecting differences is the better option.
Since I was a leader this time, my experience was a little different from usual. Instead of focusing entirely on contributing ideas, I also had to help keep the discussion moving. Looking back, I think our questions worked pretty well because they all connected to each other and gradually became deeper as the seminar went on. We probably spent a little too much time discussing definitions at the start, but at the same time, that freedom allowed people to explore ideas they were genuinely interested in.
As for my own performance, I got a 7 and an 8, which I’m pretty happy with. Since I was a leader, I fundamentally couldn’t participate as much as I normally would. It’s hard to be running the seminar and dominating the discussion at the same time. Even so, I was able to contribute to several discussions, especially the identity debate.
Overall, I enjoyed this seminar a lot. It wasn’t really about finding the “correct” answer. It was more about exploring different perspectives and challenging each other’s ideas. Those are usually the seminars that end up being the most interesting.