Canada's Wonderland and crossing the Border

Would you say that someone who has spent hours watching the Cedar Point webcams, reading trip reports and reading up on stats has a better idea what a ride on Millennium Force is like than someone who has actually ridden it? Does someone who has ridden Millennium Force rather than watched a POV video have a bias against another park because of it? That's how I see the logic in your argument. If that's not what you're saying, can you restate it please?

Bogeyman: It's right in the first paragraph--

"Of course riding the thing is the ultimate test."

I also pointed out the only way to really know a foreign country is to live/work/play there for an extended time-- Let's call this option 1. There are two other ways to learn about a country that are being compared in this discussion: 2: visit the country to see sights for 1 week, and 3: talk to people who know, read, etc. about this country but don't go there.

Clearly 1 gives you a better understanding than either 2 or 3. The question is between option 2 and 3. I disagree that option 2 is clearly superior in all cases to option 3.

I'm not sure what you read into my bias paragraph.

Well, of course there is no supremacy in any of the options. But don't forget the comparison only started because someone mentioned that option 3 was just as good as any other.

Asking how anyone could not want to travel to other countries (which was really how this discussion of the value of international travel started) is not the same as saying traveling to other countries is the only way to learn about other cultures.

People engage as much as they choose to whether it be here, in other countries, on vacations, or in their studies. That in and of itself cannot serve as the measuring stick on the value of an experience for the masses.

But at the end of the day it's pretty hard to argue that actually experiencing something firsthand by seeing it, touching it, smelling it, hearing it, etc provides a better perspective on it than just hearing about it from another source.

Umm, I stated option 1 is supreme. Do you disagree?

It seems we agree that options 2 and 3 both have value, and your last paragraph is just a strawman you created.

Too many people imply that some superficial trip overseas makes them an expert on how the world works. I'm simply saying it takes much more than that.

I disagree with the word supreme.

and your last paragraph is just a strawman you created.

Please tell me you're joking. Your entire point in this quote below was to say that you can learn just as much by reading about cultures in books or hearing about other cultures from people as you can by experiencing them firsthand.

Alan T above talks about some things he's learned by traveling, then says: "You can't learn things like that out of a book."

?? Didn't I just learn it from reading his post? I can't read/talk to people to learn these "all important but very vaguely described" things?

If I take a calculus course, I learn calculus. What exactly do I learn by seeing sights overseas (beyond the sights themselves)? Of course if you are able to tell me, then I don't have to go, right?

I went to a large university which of course has many foreign students. I had foreign roommates (though the most foreign was an American!), foreign profs, foreign officemates, and many foreign friends. Does this experience pale in comparison to a week at EuroDisney?

easily learned by attending a large university.And America DOES have many different cultures living here. That is also learned by attending a large university.

My last paragraph was in response to that.

Too many people imply that some superficial trip overseas makes them an expert on how the world works. I'm simply saying it takes much more than that.

There has been no one in this thread who has implied that. That may be your perception, but that is not what was being said or implied. If that is what you have been disputing, perhaps it is you who is employing the straw man argument.

Lankster said:
Of course riding the thing is the ultimate test. But when you visit a country for a week you don't work there, live there, put up with the clown down the street. You visit. So by my "logic" until you've lived in a foreign country for some time, you haven't "ridden it" either!

You seem to be missing my point: Spending a week at EuroDisney in and of itself is worth pretty much zilch in understanding some other "culture." If I'm riding rides during the day and holed up in my hotel at night, what am I learning? I could do the same thing visiting many foreign sights. "You need to get out and TALK to the people," is what I hear you saying, but at the same time you discount the 20+ years I have talked, lived, ect with different people JUST BECAUSE IT HAPPENED IN THE US! Apparently I could have talked to these same people in another country and it would have been a wonderful learning experience for me.

It's a matter of scale--I know people who've spent extended time overseas, many months or years. They lived there, they didn't do some whirlwind tour. THOSE people spent the time to really learn about a different culture. You can't get that with a week at EuroDisney, that's my point. (I still don't think these people have any better insight on life simply because they travelled...)

It's also been implied that learning about cultures outside the US is superior to learning about other cultures inside the US. Why? There is no attempt to say which cultures outside the US are better/worse to learn about, just that they are all better than learning about another culture inside the US. It just smacks of more anti-American bias to me.

Your "logic" seems to imply that riding a roller coaster once means you have not gained more knowledge about the ride than someone who has read about it on a roller coaster website.

I don't think anyone here is claiming that spending a week at Disneyland Paris is going to be some profound and life changing cultural experience. However, even a trip to Disneyland Paris will expose you to certain nuances of foreign cultures that you just can't experience unless you are physically there. Sure, you can talk to someone about said nuances for years and years, but that doesn't change the fact that first-hand experience is a whole other level of learning. Reading and talking about places is very one-dimensional and also makes it impossible to form your own opinion about places.

Again, no one is really arguing about spending a week at Disneyland Paris.That's a whole different ballgame. That being said, I have had the opportunity to visit places on vacation (for a week or less) as well as spending six months living abroad. Of course spending more time in a foreign place, especially living there, is going to teach you much more than a short vacation. That doesn't mean that these short trips have no value and can be equated to learning from a book or talking to someone. Even if I was only in one place for a couple days, I think that interacting with the people in their own countries, trying to communicate in their language, using their currency to buy things,eating their cuisine, etc. teaches you certain things that 3rd person knowledge cannot match.

I think that the"why" part to your question has been answered by several people who have posted to this thread. I'd be curious to know how many countries you have visited and what countries they were? Obviously, to make such strong statements you must have made several trips out of the country and know what it is like to experience cultures from within foreign countries.

How is arguing that learning about another culture from theplace where that culture originates rather than from within the confines of the US, anti-American bias? I can only hope that you and all of us Americans would want a foreigner to visit the US and experience our culture instead of gaining all of their knowledge frompop culture and what their government or parents tell them. If anything, I'm sure that lots of the anti-American bias present in the world would be dispelled if more foreigners did visit our country.

Carrie,

You are mistaken. From the start I've compared a sightseeing trip to what you can learn in other ways. I've never said you can learn more about X by reading about X than doing X.

I've said you can learn more about a country compared to someone who took a sightseeing trip. More as in knowledge about more things. Not more as in better idea how the coasters at Eurodisney are. In the quote you have I mention the sightseeing comparison more than once, and I also acknowledge the sightseers DID learn about the sights they saw. I also found it funny that Alan T was teaching me things "I couldn't learn in a book."

As for the last paragraph, I didn't say it was said on this thread--I've seen it many places.

Lilspike, show me where I've said I can learn more about a single sight by reading than experiencing? I acknowledged initially the sightseers learned about the sights. My issue was with the breadth of their experience (i.e. beyond the few things they saw). The bias is that "Americans don't have passports, what's wrong with them?"

"...experience our culture instead of gaining all of their knowledge frompop culture and what their government or parents tell them."

So your "logic" is that knowledge only comes from pop culture, govts, and parents if you don't experence things firsthand? (I know you don't mean this, but since you're misreading my arguments I have to hold you accountable for your plain words. :-) )

I've never said you can learn more about X by reading about X than doing X.

I agree. I said you indicated you can learn just as much about sightseeing by reading about sightseeing than doing sightseeing. And you in fact did say that and I've already called back to it twice.

Your second paragraph is a bit scattered. Alan T. wasn't teaching you anything in his post. That would be the first disconnect. He was offering examples of the things he couldn't truly appreciate until he experienced them firsthand. There's a big difference.

As far as the value of a sightseeing trip to another country in terms of education about the country, its culture, or anything else, that all depends on the traveler.

If all I care about is riding the coaster at EuroDisney, then that's all I'm going to get out of the trip. And yes, others could gain more from a book.

But it I go to EuroDisney and while I'm there I engage with the environment, maybe stop at a restaurant outside the park or go to the local grocery store, then my experience is greater and I will likely in fact learn more about the culture than I could from any other source.

In other words, a sightseeing trip does not necessarily mean I travel to the country, go straight to the sites, look at them, and then leave.

I said you indicated you can learn just as much about sightseeing by reading about sightseeing than doing sightseeing. And you in fact did say that and I've already called back to it twice

.

Sorry, never said that. The topic was learning about other countries and their culture. I've always been talking about the different ways to learn more about countries/culture. I've contrasted that with a sightseeing trip.

My second paragraph is trying to tell you "more" is not being used by me like you think it is. I'm not saying "more" as in deeper understanding of the coaster you rode on the trip (or in your case, the foreign apple you ate :-) ). I'm using "more" as in a wider breadth of knowledge--about things you didn't see at Eurodisney.

I've been called one-dimensional but this whole silly thing is about the multiple dimensions learning can take--more depth vs more breadth in this case. If you think I'm meaning more depth you get these stupid, nonsensical conclusions I'm calling strawmen. Of course if you read my caveat (beyond the sights themselves) that should have pushed you in the right direction.

Here is the Alan T part I found funny

In Europe a "torchlight" ski means you are handed an actual burning torch, that drips molten wax all over the place, instead of a flashlight like you get here in North America. When you leave your hotel, you hang your room key on a hook by the front desk and retrieve it when you return. If you stay in the bar to long and forget to get your key before midnight you end up throwing snowballs at your window to wake up your room mate to let you in...or so I've been told

You can't learn things like that out of a book.

[/image="http://coasterbuzz.com/Forums/images/wink.gif"]

He's not teaching me anything here? Seriously?

In other words, a sightseeing trip does not necessarily mean I travel to the country, go straight to the sites, look at them, and then leave.

Thanks for that bit of wisdom. You may want to consider the problem is not that I'm stupid, but that you think I'm stupid.

Carrie M. said: I said you indicated you can learn just as much about sightseeing by reading about sightseeing than doing sightseeing. And you in fact did say that and I've already called back to it twice

Lankster said: Sorry, never said that.

On page 4, Lankster said: How much are you really going to learn about another country by spending a week there visiting the sights? Could you not learn just as much/more by talking to someone who lives/recently lived there? Could you not learn just as much throught the internet?

Maybe I'm missing something here...

PEOPLE TAKE A PILL AND RIDE A COASTER.

I started this as a thread about crossing the boarder with the new regulations for our upcoming trip to Canada's Wonderland.

If you want to go fight about the ugly american image take it to a site that cares. All I want to do is ride.

Thanks, Vater. :)

Dave, what are you shouting for? If you want to go ride, then do so.

This part of the discussion has nothing to do with you or your trip. This thread went in several directions as many of them do around here. Lankster and I aren't fighting about anything. We are having a discussion, debating if you will. If it bothers you then don't read it.

And how are you after only being here for a few weeks going to tell me, Lankster, or anyone else where to go with our contributions to a discussion? I would say if you don't like the types of discussions we have here, then you should find somewhere else to go.

Starting a thread doesn't mean you get to control where the discussion goes. Jeff and the moderators are the folks who do that kind of thing.

If even they can. Sometimes I think controlling one of these forums must be like wrangling cats.

I can say that, Dave, you haven't been here long enough to start dictating how this well-established community should police itself. Perhaps you should step back and observe.

On page 4, Lankster said: How much are you really going to learn about another country by spending a week there visiting the sights? Could you not learn just as much/more by talking to someone who lives/recently lived there? Could you not learn just as much throught the internet?

The above translates to "you can learn just as much about sightseeing by reading about sightseeing than doing sightseeing"?

Am I missing something? The first sentence lays out we are talking about learning "about the country," not "sightseeing." It logically follows that the learning I'm talking about in sentences 2 and 3 is also "about the country."

Am I speaking a different language than you guys? :-)

My point about "you can't learn that from a book" was, as Carrie pointed out, referencing the richness of the experience of standing on the mountain at the border, experiencing sticker shock at lunch, etc. I'll let you stay at home reading and "learning" more about Switzerland and France than I'll ever know. Personally, I will follow the goat signs (you can read about that if you want to) back to Les Lindarets and have another omelet, with mushrooms only grown in that valley, and one of the best fruit tarts I've ever eaten for dessert. I will also remember to grab my room key before heading to the bar. I'll be sure to grab a book, so I can read it on the flight home, to "learn" about all the culture I missed.

My take: There are a couple of different types of learning going on.

There's learning as in facts - the history of the country, some of the stories that weave into the culture (for us the Pilgrims, the founding fathers, etc.), the landmarks, the geography, the govt. etc. I will absolutely agree that you can learn these things just as well from home.

There's also sensory learning - What does Paris smell like? What is authenic Chinese food? How does the water in the Indian Ocean feel? What does Carnival in Rio look like?

Then there are some things that fall in between (most actually) - things like : What is it like to take a siesta everyday? What is it like to try to communicate with someone in their language? What is it like to live in a place that understands time or space or family or friendship differently?

I think it's a matter of humility: the understanding that the important things about a culture are not factual but are a part of the fabric of society and have to be experienced. I'm not saying you can neccesarily get it from Euro Disney, but it's a lot closer than getting it from a book.