When you ask a person from Illinois what group of people he identifies himself the most with, the answer is American. When you ask that same question in Paris, the answer is French.
The world as we know it today is based on these national states popularised from the 19th century onwards, and that's why it's important to learn the countries, and pretty much unnecessary to learn the states of USA.
If we accepted your definition of population/geographical size as the marker for level of knowledge, all the world should also be learning the subdivisions of China, Russia, Brazil and India.
thomasquinn 32989 · Member since
True, and they should. I think as we travel more and faster, and digital communications make the world smaller and smaller, geographical and topographical knowledge are more useful than ever. That doesn't mean I have perfect knowledge of those topics myself, but it is something I work on and believe many more people ought to - it's amazing how often it is useful to have ready knowledge of such things in everyday life.
*goodco* · Member since
Well, the two a-holes were originally from Kyrgyzstan.
Jaromir Jagr.....many Pittsburgh fans wanted him deported when he signed with their bitter rivals, the Philadelphia Flyers.
American knowledge of geography: sadly, I'll bet there is a significant percentage who, when asked to name the capital of Africa, would hesitate for a moment before answering 'I don't know'.
Or 'what state is our nation's capital in?' 'I don't know' or 'Washington' would get more than a few responses.
pittrek · Member since
Reminds me on this video :-) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cey35bBWXls Sorry, I couldn't resist :-)
tero! 48531 · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]thomasquinn 32989 wrote:[/b]
True, and they should. I think as we travel more and faster, and digital communications make the world smaller and smaller, geographical and topographical knowledge are more useful than ever. That doesn't mean I have perfect knowledge of those topics myself, but it is something I work on and believe many more people ought to - it's amazing how often it is useful to have ready knowledge of such things in everyday life.[/QUOTE]
It's useful, but not that useful as a general knowledge.
People have a limited capacity to remember things, and it's usually concentrated on things they are (or feel) the closest to and need the most often.
For Europeans that means naming most of the European contries and a few others around the globe, and for the Americans it means most of the US states and a few countries around the world.
These days it's easy enough to do a web search about Chechenya before you post a message about those "damn Checks", but some people can't be bothered to make even THAT effort.
Just to clarify: I'm not saying Americans are stupid, I'm saying the vast majority of Americans are ignorant of geography outside their own country. In all fairness, I don't think most Europeans could point out more than about five American states on a map.[/QUOTE]
Why should they? It's non-essential knowledge of one country.
Knowledge of states in one's own country should bear no comparison to being able to name (and locate on a map) five other countries.
I bet you my entire music collection that more Europeans can name 5 US states than Americans can name 5 countries other than their own (with the exception of countries the media has told them they should bomb at some point in the last 50 years).[/QUOTE]
Ah, most americans could name a few countries -- remember Canada, Mexico, and England would all be well known to Americans. They might struggle beyond that (with a few additions -- Germany, France, China, Afghanistan, Iraq, India, Australia, Antarctica, maybe a few others). But i think 5 is a really low number. What i've noticed is that a lot of americans have HEARD of countries (limited countries -- or they have heard of Paris but don't know it's in France, that kind of thing), but they haven't a clue WHERE they are. Like don't ask them to find it on a map, or even to reliably identify the continent it's in.
I still remember the time i was asked how long of a train journey it was from Ireland to the USA. And the comment of 'hmm... Ireland... that's interesting... is that off the coast of New Jersey?' I guess it is... a looong way off the coast of New Jersey! I also remember LOTS of people in america asking slowly and carefully if i speak english (cos obviously i was from somewhere foreign).
catqueen · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]thomasquinn 32989 wrote:[/b]
Probably most people in Europe would regard them as Eastern European in physical appearance, with the Czechs being considered Central Europeans. [/QUOTE]
Outside of 'central Europe,' very few people use that term. I've never heard anyone described as a 'central European.' They are either European or Eastern European. And a lot of people would say anyone east of the Berlin wall is an eastern european... although my friend from Hungary doesn't consider herself eastern european, so i guess if you're from the middle bit, it's central -- but she still wouldn't describe herself as a 'central' european, she'd just say she's european, but her romanian and polish friends are eastern european.
catqueen · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]thomasquinn 32989 wrote:[/b]
The issue is not one of politics, but one of scale: the U.S. is larger than the whole of Europe, so from a topographical point of view I don't think it's unjustified to equate knowing the lay-out of European countries with that of U.S. states or Canadian provinces. I don't think it's strictly necessary for most people to know where all fifty states are located on a map, but I was putting American ignorance of international geography into perspective - on the whole, European high school students can point out more countries on a map than their American peers, but their knowledge of North American topography tends to be as sketchy as that of American students of European topography. Because the U.S. and Canada are countries on a pretty much continental scale, you can't compare their internal topography to that of, say, Germany or France.[/QUOTE]
I don't agree. I don't think it's the same thing at all. America is a fairly new country, and just on the basis of history, american students should be familiar with europe and other countries. American students don't even learn much about the rest of their own continent (and i went through the american school system for a few years). The country is very insular and it shows in their foreign policies, among other things. Maybe if they were more educated about other countries and peoples, they might be a little more understanding of immigrants and of other cultures, and could continue a dialogue rather then just attacking. It might make other people seem more human and interconnected. And even if the USA is big, the world is big and kids have a lot of brain power, they can learn about more then just 50 states.
thomasquinn 32989 · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]catqueen wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]thomasquinn 32989 wrote:[/b]
Probably most people in Europe would regard them as Eastern European in physical appearance, with the Czechs being considered Central Europeans. [/QUOTE]
Outside of 'central Europe,' very few people use that term. I've never heard anyone described as a 'central European.' They are either European or Eastern European. And a lot of people would say anyone east of the Berlin wall is an eastern european... although my friend from Hungary doesn't consider herself eastern european, so i guess if you're from the middle bit, it's central -- but she still wouldn't describe herself as a 'central' european, she'd just say she's european, but her romanian and polish friends are eastern european.[/QUOTE]
Technically, everything that was part of the Austrian-Hungarian empire (before that: Holy Roman Empire) and the Balkans is considered 'central Europe'. Everything to the east of that is considered Eastern Europe. I don't know where you are from, but in Holland and Belgium, it is very common to speak of Western-, Central- and Eastern Europe when dividing Europe in an east-west line, and of Northern- and Southern Europe when dividing along a north-south line.
catqueen · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]thomasquinn 32989 wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]catqueen wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]thomasquinn 32989 wrote:[/b]
Probably most people in Europe would regard them as Eastern European in physical appearance, with the Czechs being considered Central Europeans. [/QUOTE]
Outside of 'central Europe,' very few people use that term. I've never heard anyone described as a 'central European.' They are either European or Eastern European. And a lot of people would say anyone east of the Berlin wall is an eastern european... although my friend from Hungary doesn't consider herself eastern european, so i guess if you're from the middle bit, it's central -- but she still wouldn't describe herself as a 'central' european, she'd just say she's european, but her romanian and polish friends are eastern european.[/QUOTE]
Technically, everything that was part of the Austrian-Hungarian empire (before that: Holy Roman Empire) and the Balkans is considered 'central Europe'. Everything to the east of that is considered Eastern Europe. I don't know where you are from, but in Holland and Belgium, it is very common to speak of Western-, Central- and Eastern Europe when dividing Europe in an east-west line, and of Northern- and Southern Europe when dividing along a north-south line.[/QUOTE]
I'm from ireland, maybe we're just backwards :P But i've heard people insist up and down that anything past the berlin wall is eastern. And whatever about describing the location of somewhere -- obviously then you use central -- but i've never heard someone described as a central european, not the same as you'd describe someone as an eastern european. But maybe that's just here.
