Industrialization assisted the western countries to obtain a hegemonic status so that they are able to define the sphere of cultural localization and export its new definition into the international community. While in a world prevailing value, this exportation functions as a dogma that dominates the importing countries, it neglects the differences between social cultures that have been developed within specific contexts in which there are no common criteria. On the other hand, some researchers insisted that the gap between the East (China) and the West remains entrenched.
Their justifications focus on the differences between subjective intentions, which generate different perceptions from others, leading to produce the uncommon measurement. However, this approach overlooks their reciprocity or mutual relationship and, in turn, this deficiency may obstruct the interaction be- tween social cultures. In order to survive from these weaknesses, sharing and sympathy should be viewed as the crucial elements in over- coming the conflicts triggered by the Europeancentered thought, ethnocentrism or the results-led approach. This essay argues that the de- bate of cultural localization should be examined and understood in social contexts that have been constantly shaped and remolded by the historical flow.