I am...

An interesting observation ... (found on Aeon):

The Western focus on internal change makes anthropological sense: people in the West fixate on the internal. Psychologists have demonstrated this with a simple experiment. When researchers at Lewis and Clark College and the University of Nevada in Portland, Oregon, asked people to finish the sentence ‘I am ______’, people from the Western world responded with phrases such as ‘happy’, ‘a fun person’, or ‘a health-nut’. Meanwhile, rural Kenyans or Pacific Islanders said things such as ‘a mother’ or ‘a member of the Makea family’. Whereas most people define themselves by their relationships, people in the West emphasise their interests and personalities.

I'm not sure how the notion of 'interests and personalities' is internal and relationship is not.  Interests and personalities are actually outward tending - only in their expression is their realisation.  I fail to see how relationship is different.  Only in its exercise is a relationship alive.  One way of viewing relationships is restrictive.  They bind us to individuals.  On the other hand, is the fact that being in a relationship does not 'limit' us.  Rather than see as restrictive, relationships can be seen as linking, bridging. 

Anyway, that's a digression!

Am still amused by...

most people (rural, non-educated, tribal...) define themselves by their relationships, people in the West (educated, urban...) emphasise their interests and personalities.