Some would argue that in order for a group to make progress that they should ignore all that any other group has to say.
Many would argue that in order to gain any real measure of success - each group must rely solely upon it's own initiative.
George Boole was an Irish math whiz who lacked a complete formal education.
But George was also isolated from those with whom he could interact and learn.
Because of George's isolation, Mr. Boole was always making "discoveries" which had already been discovered.
Raja Rammohun Roy founded the Bramo Samaj movement in India in 1829.
The intent of Mr. Roy was for India to learn from those who had occupied his country and learn their ways in the context of his own culture.
Mr. Roy justified the acquisition of "foreign" knowledge without assuming any form of inferiority because he could cite the myth of the original speakers of the Indo-European languages - the "Aryan race - as his own.
It is because of Mr. Roy's philosophy that India has been able to enjoy the benefits of selective Westernization without having to give up it's own culture.
In 1861, Wei Mu-ting laid out the plans to incorporate Western thinking - thought to have originally been stolen from China with the West's interactions with the Mongols - in a manner that would return "original knowledge" to it's rightful home.
Today, much of China's success began with foreword thinking men who understood that 'knowledge' and 'power' knew no owners except those who used them best to further their own cause.
Some say to ignore all that anyone other than ones own group has to say.
But historically, the best method seems to be to take what can be learned and to incorporate that within ones own culture to further the needs and desires of any given culture.
Of course this is just my understanding of the problem...
Kind of like reading "11011" as "27" instead of "one thousand and eleven".
(Oh yeah, George Boole is often cited as the first to offer insight into binary notation.)