Micro culture?

[Heavenly Assault]

Do you think culture always has to be inherently collective in nature? I know the official definition says yes, but I contend that an individual can be their own culture, a micro culture. Each one of us has our own characters, experiences, expressions and history. We are each a little nation unto ourselves. And I'm not saying it's an either/or affair; just about everybody does have both a collective and an individual identity. The question is how valid is that individual identity? IMO, it is just as valid as any collective identity, just more ephemeral, yet nonetheless meaningful. I sometimes have the thought that if I were to become noteworthy for some reason and were to be described by Wikipedia or something like that, I would adamantly not want to be referred to as "American" because it's not my culture, just where I happened to be physically born and raised. Why can someone not just be regarded as an entity in and of themselves? (I'm also not saying environmental influence and interconnectedness don't exist.)

Do you think individuals can be "micro cultures" and if so, what level of validity do they have?

[EuroStralia]

Do you think individuals can be "micro cultures" and if so, what level of validity do they have?

No, culture is part of a shared identity not an individual one.

[Honghai]

Do you think culture always has to be inherently collective in nature? I know the official definition says yes, but I contend that an individual can be their own culture, a micro culture. Each one of us has our own characters, experiences, expressions and history. We are each a little nation unto ourselves. And I'm not saying it's an either/or affair; just about everybody does have both a collective and an individual identity. The question is how valid is that individual identity? IMO, it is just as valid as any collective identity, just more ephemeral, yet nonetheless meaningful. I sometimes have the thought that if I were to become noteworthy for some reason and were to be described by Wikipedia or something like that, I would adamantly not want to be referred to as "American" because it's not my culture, just where I happened to be physically born and raised. Why can someone not just be regarded as an entity in and of themselves? (I'm also not saying environmental influence and interconnectedness don't exist.)

Do you think individuals can be "micro cultures" and if so, what level of validity do they have?

I am one to agree. I see why not; in a hyperindividualistic and everchanging world, there's no need to hang-onto Tradition or onto olden ways. We are a world unto ourselves with our own mindset and ways-of-thinking.

[Heavenly Assault]

Do you think individuals can be "micro cultures" and if so, what level of validity do they have?

No, culture is part of a shared identity not an individual one.

Why does culture always have to be collective to be regarded as culture, though? You could easily describe a collective's culture as its "character", but individuals also have character. You cannot even have collective culture without a conglomeration of individual characters. And so that begs the question, at what number of people does a "culture" start? My best friend and I are just 2 people, but we certainly have our own distinctive culture that stands apart from everyone else. I stand apart from everyone else, so it's only rational to regard myself as an independent cultural entity.

I am one to agree. I see why not; in a hyperindividualistic and everchanging world, there's no need to hang-onto Tradition or onto olden ways. We are a world unto ourselves with our own mindset and ways-of-thinking.

And I in turn concur with everything you said with the exception of "hyperindividualistic world". We're not remotely "hyperindividualistic"; it's the exact opposite, imo.

[PaleoStralia]

No, culture is part of a shared identity not an individual one.

Why does culture always have to be collective to be regarded as culture, though? You could easily describe a collective's culture as its "character", but individuals also have character. You cannot even have collective culture without a conglomeration of individual characters. And so that begs the question, at what number of people does a "culture" start? My best friend and I are just 2 people, but we certainly have our own distinctive culture that stands apart from everyone else. I stand apart from everyone else, so it's only rational to regard myself as an independent cultural entity.

You're forgetting that personality exists.

[Existential Cats]

I mean, why stop there? Consciousness is fragmented. You can just easily claim that the human being is a multicultural host of different cultures.

Speaking as someone with a background in anthropology, culture is... very difficult to define, and plenty of anthropologists are abandoning the idea altogether. But if you're allowing for culture to be reduced to a single individual, you're throwing out several elements that many would find indispensable to a definition of the term, like kinship, law, language, etc.

[Northern Socialist Council Republics]

Classification is useful because the world is large and it is beyond my ability to learn the unique individuality of every human being there are.

[Heavenly Assault]

Why does culture always have to be collective to be regarded as culture, though? You could easily describe a collective's culture as its "character", but individuals also have character. You cannot even have collective culture without a conglomeration of individual characters. And so that begs the question, at what number of people does a "culture" start? My best friend and I are just 2 people, but we certainly have our own distinctive culture that stands apart from everyone else. I stand apart from everyone else, so it's only rational to regard myself as an independent cultural entity.

You're forgetting that personality exists.

How? And an individual is not merely just personality. I am the collective result of all my ancestors. I am a collection of cells working in unison to produce my being. I am a collection of both genetic and environmental influences, along with my collective memories and experiences. Personality is only one aspect of a person's being.

I mean, why stop there? Consciousness is fragmented. You can just easily claim that the human being is a multicultural host of different cultures.

Speaking as someone with a background in anthropology, culture is... very difficult to define, and plenty of anthropologists are abandoning the idea altogether. But if you're allowing for culture to be reduced to a single individual, you're throwing out several elements that many would find indispensable to a definition of the term, like kinship, law, language, etc.

Yeah, we all have our psychological Shadow and we don't go through life as the same person from start to finish. We are a collection of personas, each recorded in the history of the universe and expressed through the physical world. I also think an individual can embody all of those examples, too. I do have a kinship with myself; I'm also my own antagonist. I do have my own "laws", my personal laws which could not be formed in a vacuum. And language - nobody speaks exactly like me. Even if you and I were to read a same sentence aloud in a same language, there will still be obvious differences between our deliveries.

[EuroStralia]

You're forgetting that personality exists.

How? And an individual is not merely just personality. I am the collective result of all my ancestors. I am a collection of cells working in unison to produce my being. I am a collection of both genetic and environmental influences, along with my collective memories and experiences.

You're claiming that because you act different from your peers you have your own culture.

Personality is only one aspect of a person's being.

And I never said it was.

[Bombadil]

Just use the word personality, that's what it's there for.

[Ventura Bay]

I agree with the above poster, that's just personality. Being a certain way isn't indicative of having your own individual culture.

[Fractalnavel]

Not exactly what OP was talking about, but they may be interested in this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Society_of_Mind

[Risottia]

Do you think culture always has to be inherently collective in nature? I know the official definition says yes, but I contend that an individual can be their own culture, a micro culture.

No.
Culture is collective, and with a scope larger than a nuclear family or a clan: a tribe, at the very least. You're thinking of personality and character, which is the product of individual genetics, upbringing, education and personal experience.