There can be no exact answer to this question. Various cultures interact with each other. Although it seems that many foreigners are studying China culture now, we can see that more people are studying western culture in China, such as English! Management, movies, animation, media networks and many other scientific and technological things. When other people's cultures know that our hands are changing, they become our own things, just like copying an article. Hehe, so there is no particularly clear boundary between eastern and western cultures now. As time goes on, the whole earth will be a complete culture. China's modern novels draw lessons from the foreign literature in Lu Xun's Diary of a Madman, which makes a turning point in the literary history of China for thousands of years and gives it a new direction and goal. This is also a disadvantage. Up to now, although there are not many good works published, most of them still stand still and have no breakthrough. This is one of the reasons why China literature has always been difficult to stand on the world.

In a word, different people have different views on this issue. In Lu Xun's view, there are only two kinds of foreign cultures, brought and sent. Let's look at "bring it" first. Foreign cultures are diverse, and mud and sand are everywhere. There is no difference between the advantages and disadvantages of the negotiable part. Even if it is not negotiable, it must be reduced through mechanism. In addition, it adds a prerequisite for the debate. We should see two results: first, the national cultural foundation has been completely transformed, foreign culture dominates, and the national subject consciousness has been completely lost, and the advantages and disadvantages are self-evident; Secondly, the self-sufficient value system is decomposed into value judgments cut off from it. Everyone has different standards of right and wrong. Is it beneficial or harmful to the self-adjustment of national culture and social stability? Then watch Send It. We can't talk about the problem in isolation from its background. Marx believes that when capital connects the world, "it will change the whole world in its own face." Did it just send flowers and bread? No, history has proved that it is only an anesthetic for the national spirit before surgery, and its purpose is to force the disadvantaged groups to identify with their new owners. It is true that we have introduced some civilizations such as science, technology and management experience today, because we know that the development of Chinese civilization cannot be separated from foreign civilizations. However, we must see that in the post-cold war era, political and military "hard power" as a means of global westernization has shifted to cultural "soft power". Can we still insist that foreign culture does more harm than good to the development of national culture? Anthropologist Murphy said: "Culture is the product of human wisdom, and it is the unique lifestyle and characteristics, behavior patterns and patterns of different societies. From Benedict to Ember, from Liang Shuming to Qian Mu, they all think that things (systems) are civilizations, while culture only includes spiritual level and value system. But the other party told us that culture includes material aspects, which is obviously a stolen proposition. National culture refers to the national spirit and value system that leads the cultural changes of sovereign countries. Foreign culture refers to the values and thinking system from outside the nation. The topic of today's debate is full name trial. The other party should tell us that foreign culture is beneficial to the development of national culture no matter when, where and under what circumstances. But the other side told us to "take the essence and discard the dross". Isn't this a selection mechanism for foreign cultures? This is obviously the second time to steal a proposition. In Lu Xun's view, there are only two kinds of foreign cultures, brought and sent. Let's look at "bring it" first. Foreign cultures are diverse, and mud and sand are everywhere. There is no difference between the advantages and disadvantages of the negotiable part. Even if it is not negotiable, it must be reduced through mechanism. In addition, it adds a prerequisite for the debate. We should see two results: first, the national cultural foundation has been completely transformed, foreign culture dominates, and the national subject consciousness has been completely lost, and the advantages and disadvantages are self-evident; Secondly, the self-sufficient value system is decomposed into value judgments cut off from it. Everyone has different standards of right and wrong. Is it beneficial or harmful to the self-adjustment of national culture and social stability? Mr. Qian Mu also said that artifacts and systems belong to the category of civilization. Civilization itself has no advantages or disadvantages, and can only be judged in a certain culture. As a spiritual value system, culture has no distinction between advanced and backward. The foreign culture we are discussing today mainly refers to the part that is incommensurable with the national culture. Because the culture that can be agreed upon, such as diligence and courage, are all human characteristics, and there is no distinction between Chinese and foreign. After defining the basic concepts, we say that judging whether foreign culture is conducive to the development of national culture depends first on whether it is conducive to maintaining the subjective consciousness of national culture. Foreign culture comes uninvited, or directly drives people's hearts, or imperceptibly, and its ultimate goal is to replace the value system of national culture with its own value system. Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages? Second, it depends on whether foreign culture is conducive to maintaining the law of national culture's own development. Since it is incompatible with national culture, foreign culture is incompatible with the natural and social environment that inevitably produces national culture. If we mechanically copy and forcibly graft, it will inevitably destroy the development law of national culture itself. At the same time, due to acclimatization, it will also have a negative impact on the foreign culture itself. Excuse me, do both sides have more advantages than disadvantages?