>>3605582>But why doesn't this behavior last?Because of family. Family is the heart of conservatism. If teenage rebellion is temporary as you say, then a person simply reverts to the family-given ideas given to them before. It's not necessarily innate.
That said, I'm not 100% against you: perhaps some traits are innate and genetic. I just doubt it's as extensive as you claim.
>It has a limited effect, and it's irrelevant to the pointMy apologies. I only meant it as an example.
What I really mean is that social change can happen, it just requires any method of subverting family.
Thus, even religion can be changed. In history, for example, we see that poor people in India accepted Islam and Christianity because they were poor, and not necessarily due to any personality factors. A religion with a weaker caste system is attractive to people at the bottom.
Similarly, when Christianity was spreading throughout Europe, replacing pagan religions, people who accepted Christianity first did it for socioeconomic reasons.
And when Islam was first spreading from the Arabian peninsula, and eventually up into the balkans, people converted just to have a better socioeconomic standing when non-muslims were discriminated against.
Perhaps some really liked the religion. But a lot of the time, people just pick what's convenient. And what's convenient is generally conformism.
Conformism at home to parents, conformism at school to teachers, it's all the same.
>All languages can express all ideasNo, some languages don't have the same color words as others, and those people genuinely understand color in a different way and do NOT express the same color ideas you and I can.
>exclusiveness or inclusiveness does not depend on languageI wouldn't be surprised if this wasn't true. Why do you think some people push newspeak so hard?
