Why is culture?

[Clinias]

The word "human" is a universal. What forms the culture is the particular of race.

Humans don't create culture--only races create particular culture. Since America is a Novus Ordo and about mixing of races together--it is not only anti-civilization but also anti-culture. America doesn't have a culture anymore. It is a mishmash of vulgarity and degredation.

The Englishman only exists in English culture. The Japanese man only exists in Japanese culture.

Western Culture is now dead and therefore Western man does not exist.

Races create culture "humans" do not.

[Conde Lucanor]

I ll try to elaborate my thoughts here.

I am not implying that there is anything 'above human' that is imposing culture on humans. Culture is built by humans for humans.
I mentioned 'Human civilization is humans working together to survive and culture is to protect this system from human.'
Here I am thinking from starting, when humans started living together and working together. Consider our basic needs - food, cloth, shelter. For individual human to fulfill all his needs on his own is difficult. So if humans work together, some humans grow food and some create clothes and share, it is easier. That's where comes 'Human civilization is humans working together to survive'.
Now, humans have emotions - love, happiness, sadness, anger, hate, lust etc. When negative emotions, like anger, goes to extremes it creates problem. (I am not sure if positive emotions goes to extremes whether it creates problem)

Let's consider two humans - one grows food another create clothes.
When these two humans are working and living together, if anger or hate is generated in these humans due to some conflicts, it becomes difficult to work/live together. Here there is need of something to control human emotions and resolve conflicts. Culture is system or set of rules to follow when these negative emotions goes to extremes.

Who creates culture? Here I see two ways: 1. When the same humans, who had conflict, come to calmness, think about their issue. If they abandon each other they have to fulfill all their needs on there own. So they themselves set some ground rules, limitations to resolve any conflicts may occur. Here each of them have to do two work - one will grow food and create culture and another will create clothes and culture. Here each will have more work but will have good understanding of culture(rules).
2. When there is third human, he can create culture for previous two humans. Now work is divided, civilization expanded. This third human gives culture as product to them and gets food and cloth.

In both ways its humans only who create culture.

Now in second way, The third human who creates culture becomes a creator, and other two becomes followers. These followers concentrate on creating food,cloth and just follow the rules created by third human and will not have complete understanding of culture. These followers will not think or questions much about the rules they are following as it works well in their current conditions. They become addicted to following these rules. When fourth human comes up with different/better strategy for living/working together and asks other three humans to follow, there comes problem. The followers who are addicted to following the old culture do not want to change, and the creator of old culture don't want to let the value of what he created to go down. Here again conflicts created. So to resolve this we need another culture. So it keeps going.

Here cultures I mentioned are to control emotions which creates conflicts when living/working together. Examples of these culture I can say are religions, communities which has set of rules - mainly beliefs.
Another type of cultures are to motivate humans to live/work together. Here examples are art, styles - food style, cloths style etc. These will be to invoke positive emotions.

Ok, thanks for clarifying.

It looks like you're defending some version of the "social contract" theory, which I find very limited to explain culture. The main problem with it is that it implies that agents are perfectly rational, conscious beings, which devise rules as instruments of self-control. A rational response to given circumstances. A better explanation of culture takes into account other elements of historical and social contexts of which the subjects are unconscious, including innate features of the species, the work of past generations and the influence of other societies. It means also that humans are shaped by circumstances, at the same time that circumstances shape humans.

[Conde Lucanor]

What forms the culture is the particular of race...

Races create culture "humans" do not.

Can we, in the 21st century, still give some serious consideration to an ontological concept of race? Culture has very little to do with race, except when the concept of race was formed.