Curtis wrote: Culture does not explain Fukushima.
People have autonomy to choose; at issue are the choices they make, not the cultural context in which they make them. If obedience to authority is such an ingrained trait in Japan, how then is it possible for a group of Japanese to write a report that not only questions but lambasts authority, anything but an example of reflexive obedience? The culture argument is specious.

There seems to be a sort of conceptual muddle here, one, between culture as a moral excuse for certain untoward actions, and culture as a shaper of behavior; and two, the impression that individual choice functions in some rational choice world outside of cultural context, or that the two are opposed in some way.

One: Let's suppose a KKK Grand Wizard claimed that they killed based on their belief in Christianity. Well, no one would be denying that religion influenced their behavior just because some Christians did not go around lynching, that is. provided some counter-factual. We might say that their belief in Christianity does not justify their actions, or that this was a perversion of some true Christianity, but we would not imagine them unrelated.

Second: to my knowledge, no individual has ever made a single choice outside of any cultural context, so I guess we do not have much data on that rational choice fantasy. Moreover, I cannot imagine any formulation of "culture" that precludes individual choice--indeed, it is through choice (and individual action more
generally) that cultures develop and change. (To the extend that the report suggests culture somehow absolves individuals form the moral consequences, it should be challenged, of course.)

To say that the strategic invocation of "Japanese Culture" does not excuse the gross neglect of duty or common sense or what-have-you is fine--and clearly true. It does not follow that culture does not shape, influence and structure the choices that individuals make.

David Slater
Sophia U.