Culture functions as a dynamic system that connects various people through shared experiences and practices. While the concept of a network illustrates these connections, it fails to convey how culture is constantly evolving. Instead, it's more accurate to view culture as a system of interrelated components. For instance, consider the process of obtaining food: farmers grow it, factories process it, truckers deliver it, and stores sell it. When a family enjoys a meal, numerous individuals—from farmers to factory workers and even financial institutions—have contributed to that moment, highlighting the intricate web of interactions involved in everyday life.
Simplify the following
Culture exists as a network linking many different
people. The idea of a network is useful because it
captures the essential point that culture connects
many people together and exists in what they share.
The problem with the idea of a network is that it
doesn’t sufficiently capture the dynamic (changing)
aspect of culture. Culture never sits still.
Instead of a network, therefore, it is useful to think of
culture as a system consisting of many moving parts
that work together. Think, for example, of how
people get food nowadays: farmers grow it, factories
process it, truckers transport it, stores display it,
people buy it and cook it. When a family sits down
to dinner, it is likely that 50 or 100 other people have
directly helped get that food there (not to mention
the thousands of others who were indirectly
involved, including the management of the
supermarket chain, the banks that financed the
farms and the trucking company, the corporations
that paid the mother and father the salaries they
used to buy the food, the factories that built the
refrigerator and stove, the suppliers of electricity,
and so on).
1 answer