What does Bastien say lies at the heart of the Eurocentred concept of culture? How is that different from its Siksikaitsitapi counterpart?
According to Bastien, Eurocentred concept of culture describes the nature of humanness is represented by an objectified self while in the Siksikaitsitapi concept of culture originated from spiritual relationships as well as kinship relations (p. 16). They heavily emphasize on cosmic relationships and alliances with the natural world.
In the heart of the Eurocentred concept of culture, self-intelligence and selfknowledge is what represents humanness. It is based on individuality and reality, which is opposite to the Siksikaitsitapi concept of culture. In the Eurocentred concept, human development and education came from dealing with realistic ideas and knowledge, rather than events or experiences. Bastein states, “Culture and self thus have become abstractions that can be controlled and manipulated in accordance with the values of Eurocentred societies” (p.17).
The Eurocentred concept of culture is quite the opposite of the Siksikaitsitapi concept of culture. In the Siksikaitsitapi culture, they believe the human development and the culture development came from sacred source, known as Ihtsipaitapiiyo’pi. They believe that the development of self and culture comes from experiences and relationships with the natural world and with other people.