Multicultural Canon Australia

Cultures have cannons, but a multicultural society or people cannot have cannon.

A culture is a complex set of shared beliefs and values, and concepts which enables a group to make sense of its life and which provides it with directions for how to live. We live in a culture and culture is written into us in a process of internalisation. Australia is a melting pot of races, cultures and beliefs. This country was built by people from many different national backgrounds, and has followed an active policy of multiculturalism. If Australia were have a multicultural canon it would be very complicated due to cultures accommodate a variety of values and beliefs, and if we could manage to have a multicultural canon there would be conflict about what
Hegel suggests there could be a multicultural society, which involves a clash between cultures-conflict and synthesis, however Plato suggests that a perfect ideal exists in which only some can reach that point. Hegel and Plato both oppose my argument, they are for- there could be a multicultural canon but Hegel’s form is that people may argue for instance two people come up with two different ideas and in the end they combine and come up with a conclusion but form that conclusion another idea is inserted and it continues like a triangle, I agree with Hegel in that area but I don’t believe that we could conclude with a multicultural canon it will keep going and will never
This concept relates the issue of establishing a cultural canon in a multicultural context. A cultural canon is decided by individuals or the way they have been taught up, their values and beliefs apply to them in a good way but if you place their values and beliefs in a multicultural context it will not blend well because there are many values and beliefs that goes the same with the artwork if you replace it will cognitive, moral or political benefit into the context it will not blend because those benefits has nothing to do with how the artwork looks, an artwork is suppose to be pleasure to yourself not because of cognitive, more or political benefits but the way it looks. This debate relates to the concept of judgment of taste by saying because of cognitive, moral or political benefit this artwork can be viewed in a pleasurable way but really that is not true, that is only a judgment of the values but not the artwork itself therefore just an unfair judgment that people agree