| Summary: | It is known that the term "culture" is very polysemic. The concept to which it alludes, even with scarce centuries of existence, is very broad and encompasses a myriad of definitions and connotations, which have been treated by ethologists, anthropologists and educators in their different fields. But almost all of them underlie a vision of knowledge transmission, as well as progressivity and growth. Cultural development can be considered as an imperative of behavior for personal and social development. However, in recent times this imperative seems to be blurred in a looser sense of its meaning, where other spurious meanings fit, giving way to the articulation of discourses that are far from their original goal.
Is culture a means to produce development? Or is development a means to produce culture? Should they be the cultural agents or social educators on whom responsibility for righting this drift influenced by the consumer markets? Should these, however, merely redistribute demands and offers?
Within the framework of our economic system, perhaps the key to this mutation or failure of culture can be found in a growing practice of cultic activity as a ritual and idle phenomenon, which places greater emphasis on the economic benefit of its practice, leaving Aside their important role in the development and knowledge on different subjects. As an attitude, culture, rather than a laissez faire, should be a dialogue and not an acceptance and submission to a single thought imposed by the system.
|
|---|
