The Great Canadian Skyline Thread!

[Nouvellecosse]

You can't generalize to the extent of expecting everyone to share a particular trait, but you can certainly observe trends and averages.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by kool maudit

no country really "has it right" insofar as these things are pretty subjective. .

Yeah... the idea that there is a right way of being for such things is just... I dunno.

Also, funny how people don't like it when people generalize about Canada/Anglo-Canada/Toronto/Mainlanders or whatever, but are quick to make generalizations about 330 million Americans who are pushy, obnoxious, argumentative, whatever...

[Nouvellecosse]

^ Wait a second. You're taking issue with generalization right after on the previous page confirming you whole-heartedly endorsed with said generalization?

Originally Posted by Acajack

I think you're absolutely right. And this trait that Americans have can often lead to conversations that, for many Canadians, are a bit uncomfortable. But these conservations can also be much more satisfying and compelling too.

Living proof that there is a good and a bad side to everything.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

^ Wait a second. You're taking issue with generalization right after on the previous page confirming you whole-heartedly endorsed with said generalization?

I am not taking issue with generalizations at all. I am taking issue with the inconsistency in how the acceptability of generalizations is applied.

If it's OK to generalize about the U.S. then it's OK to generalize about Canada. That's all.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by kool maudit

it depends what you are used to. for norwegians, we operate at a comfortable level. for brazilians, we probably seem stilted and awkward.

no country really "has it right" insofar as these things are pretty subjective. for most equatorial people, in my experience, canadians are a frosty bunch, as are scandinavians.

the united states is a very large country and in many places a hot one. because of its heritage, i think we expect it to have more in common with northwestern europe than it sometimes does. i think it is surprising that it is not even more unruly-seeming, and as it relatively declines over the next century i expect this aspect to assert itself.

Very true that it's all subjective. People that are often perceived as being mouthy and opinionated seem to feel they're doing just fine and say things like, "Hey, I'm just callin' 'em like I see 'em" or "Just tellin' it like it is" or "I'm just keepin' it real baby". Of course the notion that you can be honest but still tactful, or the concept that even though they have an opinion on something doesn't actually make it any of their business seems to never have occurred to them.

But yes whether any of these traits are good or bad is subjective. But whether they facilitate positive and meaningful interaction is not. These things could be objectively observed and tested. I haven't conducted any sociological work on the topic, but based on my observations, I would certainly be willing for form a hypothesis. In fact I believe I already did!

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I am not taking issue with generalizations at all. I am taking issue with the inconsistency in how the acceptability of generalizations is applied.

If it's OK to generalize about the U.S. then it's OK to generalize about Canada. That's all.

It isn't ok to generalize and imply that everyone in either place shares a characteristic but it is ok to observe that certain characteristics are more common in one place that another and discuss the impacts and pros and cons of such traits.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

.

But yes whether any of these traits are good or bad is subjective. But whether they facilitate positive and meaningful interaction is not. These things could be objectively observed and tested.

Really? How so? How can you have a meaningful discussion based on ideas with someone when you don't even know what they really think?

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

It isn't ok to generalize and imply that everyone in either place shares a characteristic but it is ok to observe that certain characteristics are more common in one place that another and discuss the impacts and pros and cons of such traits.

And it's equally OK to do this when talking about Canada as it is when talking about the U.S. - right?

[Beedok]

Skylines people!

http://www.brainsbrainsbrains.org/tag/zombie-war/page/2/

http://vagabond.fr/news/2012

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Really? How so? How can you have a meaningful discussion based on ideas with someone when you don't even know what they really think?

Being tactful or diplomatic doesn't mean you don't know what someone thinks it means that you avoid bringing judgment or accusation into the interaction. The "Tellin' it like it is" people have made up their mind, rendered their verdict, and the other person is left angry, offended and defensive and generally either shuts down and then complains about the person later, or levies a reverse accusation and it all just turn into an argument. If the person on the receiving end has an exceptionally patient and articulate they may be able to eventually alter the person's opinion, but in most cases they're simply on the receiving end.

Originally Posted by Acajack

And it's equally OK to do this when talking about Canada as it is when talking about the U.S. - right?

As long as it's actually accurate. It's ok if generalizations don't apply to everyone (as long as you're being clear and understand that fact) but they have to actually be true on the larger sense. For instance, if you were to say it's much different living in the US since the US is much warmer than Canada, when in reality there are many people living in parts of the US that aren't much if any warmer than where people live in Canada, that generalization would not be accurate as it wouldn't apply to whole regions rather than just having individual exceptions.

But fortunately I've been nothing if not consistent in this area so this line of questioning has little purpose.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

Being tactful or diplomatic doesn't mean you don't know what someone thinks it means that you avoid bringing judgment or accusation into the interaction. The "Tellin' it like it is" people have made up their mind, rendered their verdict, and the other person is left angry, offended and defensive and generally either shuts down and then complains about the person later, or levies a reverse accusation and it all just turn into an argument. If the person on the receiving end has an exceptionally patient and articulate they may be able to eventually alter the person's opinion, but in most cases they're simply on the receiving end.
.

These in my experience are more traits of personality that individuals have, as opposed to character traits that exist among nations made up of millions of people.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

As long as it's actually accurate. It's ok if generalizations don't apply to everyone (as long as you're being clear and understand that fact) but they have to actually be true on the larger sense. For instance, if you were to say it's much different living in the US since the US is much warmer than Canada, when in reality there are many people living in parts of the US that aren't much if any warmer than where people live in Canada, that generalization would not be accurate as it wouldn't apply to whole regions rather than just having individual exceptions.

But fortunately I've been nothing if not consistent in this area so this line of questioning has little purpose.

I haven't gone back to check for you but that certainly isn't the case for everyone on this forum.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by Acajack

These in my experience are more traits of personality that individuals have, as opposed to character traits that exist among nations made up of millions of people.

Yes, that i think we can all agree on. There's a far bigger difference between a loud, pushy American and a cool, tactful American then there is between a loud pushy American and a loud pushy Canadian.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

Yes, that i think we can all agree on. There's a far bigger difference between a loud, pushy American and a cool, tactful American then there is between a loud pushy American and a loud pushy Canadian.

And there is nothing about holding one passport vs. the other that prevents a person from being either one of these personality types.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by Acajack

And there is nothing about holding one passport vs. the other that prevents a person from being either one of these personality types.

Yes but let's not get carried away here. We can agree on the point that there are bigger variations between individuals than between nationalities, but that doesn't mean there aren't any differences in the frequency or intensity in which particular traits appear in one place versus the other.

If we're simply discussing psychology and sociology then we can safely set aside the nationality for the most part and focus on the individual people but if we're comparing and contrasting between countries then we're setting aside the variations between individuals and examining the national averages. Both are interesting topics in their own right but they're two different topics.

[The_Architect]

Originally Posted by saffronleaf

How do you square it with continued implementation of puritanical laws, like the recent smoking ban on open-air patios of privately owned restaurants?

This isn't puritanical, just smart, considerate and overdue.

[rousseau]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Yeah... the idea that there is a right way of being for such things is just... I dunno.

It's personal preference. Nobody's claiming that everyone should be Scandinavian. But is it really so shocking that some anglo-Canadians on this board are expressing a preference for Canadian reserve?

I recognize that my criticisms of the American way of social interaction were probably too exuberant, but they are understandable as a reaction to the constant blaring of "We're Americans! Don't ya just love us?!" propaganda that we are subjected to 24-7.

In other words, it's yet another manifestation of the standard Canadian identity crisis vis-a-vis the U.S. Ho-hum. Maybe someday we'll move beyond it. Maybe this emerging Canadian identity makes what I'm saying irrelevant, a remnant of a former time. What do the twenty-somethings say?

Originally Posted by Acajack

Also, funny how people don't like it when people generalize about Canada/Anglo-Canada/Toronto/Mainlanders or whatever, but are quick to make generalizations about 330 million Americans who are pushy, obnoxious, argumentative, whatever...

Have people on this forum really objected to the generalization regarding anglo-Canadian reserve? I know I wouldn't. As far as generalizations go, it's an inarguable fact.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by rousseau

It's personal preference. Nobody's claiming that everyone should be Scandinavian. But is it really so shocking that some anglo-Canadians on this board are expressing a preference for Canadian reserve?

.

"I just like this way better"

is not the same as

"this way is better"

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by rousseau

I recognize that my criticisms of the American way of social interaction were probably too exuberant, but they are understandable as a reaction to the constant blaring of "We're Americans! Don't ya just love us?!" propaganda that we are subjected to 24-7.
.

But it's mostly willing self-exposure. You have the option of tuning it out way more than you do at the moment, and this would be even easier to do if greater numbers of you really wanted to tune it out.

[Boris2k7]

Calgary Skyline by Heidi Schuyt Photography, on Flickr