WEIRD is an acronym that stands for a specific demographic that is Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich and Democratic. Everywhere, and especially in academia, the term is a buzzword that critiques the overwhelming scholarly focus on said demographic. Originally introduced in 2010 by Joseph Henrich, the current Ruth Moore Professor of Human Evolutionary Biology at Harvard University, and his then-colleagues, WEIRD started as a highlight on a scientific flaw — a population from which data collection relies on even though it is not representative of humanity by any means. But the packaged-up bundle of traits are, ironically, assigning boxes with a divide between the “West” and “non-West,” or “East.” Despite its well-intentioned origins, “WEIRD” perpetuates a binary that the term was meant to dissolve.
This versus that. Them versus us. You versus me. This binary mode of thinking has been a cognitive preference as long as one can remember. In an interview with Forbes, psychologist Andrew Hartz explains it as “splitting,” a phenomenon in which an individual uses black-and-white thinking due to subconscious discomfort with ambivalence. The consequences of splitting can be significant, Hartz said, as it distorts our perception of reality and consequently how we respond.
In the case of the so-called West and the East, these two cultural entities seem to occupy opposite ends of the spectrum: the West as scientific and individualistic; the East as traditional and collectivist. This line of thinking pervades from casual conversation to academic spaces. Can such simplistic cultural dualism hold the truth when the latter seems to trickle outside of the former’s grasp?
I have always been quick to tell others that everything I am boils down to collectivism. Born into a Vietnamese family, I was taught from an early age that we are our family, our society, our community and then ourselves. I believed this. I lived it. In many ways, I still do. But I have always been at odds with myself.
My first flight to the U.S. was in seventh grade as I embarked with a student Visa in one hand and a dream in the other. I became my own entity, distinct and apart from a larger whole in a way that made me pause and rethink the tension that started to emerge within. I dyed my hair with colors that would have made my grandparents cringe. I adopted a fashion style (e.g. bright red overalls and rainbow patchwork cardigans) one would rarely see on Vietnamese streets. But still, I remain steadfast with a sense of duty that connects my goals to the world, a value imparted upon me since I was young.
I settle somewhere in between the fight between collectivism and individualism; I am beyond competing cultural expectations that do not align. There is freedom in recognizing my own multitudes that do not exist in opposition to someone else’s.
WEIRD falls into the same trap of oversimplifying cultural differences, molding populations into boxes not meant to encapsulate the complexities of humanity. You can find collectivist values in parts of the West — such as the core values of Occidental relating to community engagement, or the Scandinavian concept of “janteloven,” which discourages focus on individual accomplishments in favor of the collective. Similarly, a study with data from 78 countries published by the Association for Psychological Science, shows increasing individualistic tendencies in the East and all over the world. In fact, Henrich himself has advised against using WEIRD to create a dichotomy between West and East. He has pointed out that psychological variation is “continuous and multidimensional,” a fact that’s often lost when we try to categorize people based on geography, economics or political systems. The problem with “WEIRD” is that language can set up mental shortcuts.
Language plays a huge role in shaping how people think in terms of spatial orientation. Many languages — like those spoken in Australia or parts of South America — use cardinal directions (north, south, east, west) instead of left or right. This simple linguistic difference has a profound impact on the speaker’s ability to navigate the world, Lera Boroditsky, associate professor of Cognitive Science at the University of California, San Diego points out.
In English, we say “John broke the vase,” assigning direct agency, while speakers of Spanish or Japanese might say, “the vase broke itself,” emphasizing the event over the agent (it is notable that there are differences even within Western languages e.g. Spanish and English.) These linguistic variations shape perceptions of responsibility, causality and even justice, Boroditsky said, which means the dividing perception between East and West could be exacerbated via language.
The more we rely on words like WEIRD, the easier it becomes to think of the world in binary terms — but cultural variations are too vast to be contained by a single term. While WEIRD can function as a heuristic, we must move beyond trying to fit ourselves into restrictive boxes, especially as we move toward a globalized world where such confinement feels increasingly outdated. The same goes for Occidental, where students actively challenge constructs pertaining to identity, culture and events, with growing awareness of nuanced perspectives. By focusing on the diversity of the human experience and pushing for realistic conceptualization through details and nuance, we can refrain from reducing populations to five (or any) categories. We can — and must — do better than WEIRD.
Contact Val Nguyen at vnguyen4@oxy.edu
