If 'cultural appropriation' can have any sensible meaning at all - it would be equivalent to 'plagiarism' -> claiming something one didn't create as one's own. Dresses, jewelry etc are just uses which infact enhance the status of the culture.
Yes this is what I had in mind! His use of 'cultural appropriation' in the sense of not-attributing ideas mined from dharmic sources is legitimate, but unfortunately that's not what the term broadly means today.
-
-
indeed: like in science, I am not saying one should not fight non-citation but once you put a technology (the broadest sense) in public to expect others not to use it is nonsensical: I'm unaware of a human culture which doesnt. even those perceived as closed like Japanese opened
-
Indeed. This also unfortunately associates with 'everything came from India' Oakism. There's no easy answers here. Only way forward is to actually produce knowledge worth appropriating again, this time with cultural marketing
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.