>>1528278>It's using a big important word to describe a small aspect of life.I disagree with you value judgement in the word. It's not a "big important word". It's just a word, that describes a concept that can be applied on different scales in your life.
>a polak, an eskimo, and a zulu all meet on a bike trail while riding. None of them share a common language, religion, place of origin, or general worldview. Are they all the same culture because they're riding bikes?If they keep meeting on the trail they will develope patterns of interaction, based on their circumstance of ridging bikes together, and bam you have a small culture, if only within the group of three persons.
Other groups are likely to develope similar patters due to similar circumstances, and then it becomes meaningful to speak of a more general cycling culture. Obvisouly this does not preclude differences and variations. Take the cycling culture in the Netherlands vs. the cycling culture in the States as an obvious example. The bicycle culture in these two places are very different from each other, but each place has a general attitude and way of doing things in regards to riding bikes, that it's meaningful to speak of the cyling culture in either place.
And your example people with nothing in common is obviously contrived in this information age where we are communcating with each other globally more than ever.
>any more than fishing or carpentry,These things have their own cultures I'm certain, based both in local traditions but in large based the same basic constraints of being the same activity.
