Richard Nisbett and Dov Cohen argued in a classic study that (US) Southern politeness is a reaction to high levels of aggression:
"(The authors also theorize that Southern politeness could be a response to Southern aggression—if Southerners are more likely to take offense than other regional cultures, it follows they would be less likely to give offense, for safety’s sake.)"
http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/The-312/July-2012/American-Violence-and-Southern-Culture/
That seems to be very much in line with your line of thinking. According to this line of reasoning, "honour" cultures in which people are likely to take offence easily, should generally be more polite.
They made two kinds of experiments that seems to support this line of thinking. In the first, they compared how Southern and Northern young males reacted if you bumped in to them in a conspicuous fashio. Unsurprisingly, the Southerners got more angry. In the second experiment, the experimenters' collaborators nearly bumped into Southern and Northern young males - in which case the Southerners would be more likely to go out of way to avoid bumping. This makes sense - you should be more careful to avoid bumping into people in a culture where people are more likely to be upset, one would think.
(I can't find these experiments now though, but it is in line with the quote above.)
So the question is a bit complicated. At the same time, it was interesting to read this very useful comment in the wait vs interrupt comment thread, on French (interrupt) vs American (wait) culture:
"Americans often expressed surprise in my presence at the fact that French people, “who claim to be very big on manners,” are themselves so “rude”:"
http://lesswrong.com/lw/j5n/wait_vs_interrupt_culture/a3c2
What the Americans were thinking of was that the French were not good at listening and frequently interrupted the speaker. At the same time, my guess is that French culture is generally more aggressive - it is more of an "honour" culture - than the US is. In any case, I know for a fact that French culture is more aggressive than my own, Swedish, culture, and Swedes are likely to make similar comments as Americans to this kind of behaviour.
So it seems to me that the whole issue of politeness is quite complicated - there are several different aspects of politeness. I'm thinking many traditional "honour" cultures focus heavily on adherence to some polite "rituals" - titles, never bump into anyone, always pay the bill at restaurants, etc; really salient things - whereas more modern cultures don't focus on that. Swedes don't use titles at all, for instance. On the other hand, Swedish traffic, conversational style, etc, are very polite. Perhaps it reflects the fact that Protestantism (Sweden is a Protestant country, as is the US to a large extent) focuses less on rituals than most other religions (e.g. Catholicism). (I realize that this might sound a bit prejudiced; sorry about that.)
I also think there might be several different reasons for why you could end up a guesser or asker. One reason might why you end up as a guesser is that you know that people around you are very easily offended. In this case, guessing is driven by fear. But it might also be that you are a guesser because you're considerate - you don't want to hurt other people, and you know that if you're not trying to put yourself in the other person's shoes and imagine what they're thinking, there is a risk that might happen when you start asking them things.
Conversely, you might end up an asker because you're just unusuall candid. But there is also another kind of asker - the pushy domineering types. Their questions aren't really questions but a kind of semi-orders. Now my guess is that the latter kind of askers are much more common than people in this thread seem to think. Also, because they're so common, people are likely to interpret the first kind of askers as being domineering, even though that wasn't their intention. This is a fact, and something that people who wish our culture to be more candid and open will have to take into account. They cannot blame the interpreter if they're interpreted in this way, since that's the normal interpretation of asky behaviour in our culture. Perhaps the "tell" proposal is an attempt to deal with this fact, but I'm not sure I think it's very succesful.
In any case, it would be interesting to hear or read more empirical stuff on this question. The Pinker video and the quote on French vs American conversational styles were really good. I really think this is the way to go since otherwise there is a risk that we just end up trading anecdotes and prejucided images of ask/guess culture with each other.
Interesting! I wonder what it tells us that both Finnish and Swedish have been losing the construct of using the plural you (Finnish "Te", Swedish "Ni") as a formal/respectful form of the singular you. A consequence of both countries becoming higher-trust, or something else?
Followup to: Ask and Guess
Ask culture: "I'll be in town this weekend for a business trip. Is it cool if I crash at your place?" Response: “Yes“ or “no”.
Guess culture: "Hey, great news! I'll be in town this weekend for a business trip!" Response: Infer that they might be telling you this because they want something from you, conclude that they might want a place to stay, and offer your hospitality only if you want to. Otherwise, pretend you didn’t infer that.
The two basic rules of Ask Culture: 1) Ask when you want something. 2) Interpret things as requests and feel free to say "no".
The two basic rules of Guess Culture: 1) Ask for things if, and *only* if, you're confident the person will say "yes". 2) Interpret requests as expectations of "yes", and, when possible, avoid saying "no".
Both approaches come with costs and benefits. In the end, I feel pretty strongly that Ask is superior.
But these are not the only two possibilities!
"I'll be in town this weekend for a business trip. I would like to stay at your place, since it would save me the cost of a hotel, plus I would enjoy seeing you and expect we’d have some fun. I'm looking for other options, though, and would rather stay elsewhere than inconvenience you." Response: “I think I need some space this weekend. But I’d love to get a beer or something while you’re in town!” or “You should totally stay with me. I’m looking forward to it.”
There is a third alternative, and I think it's probably what rationalist communities ought to strive for. I call it "Tell Culture".
The two basic rules of Tell Culture: 1) Tell the other person what's going on in your own mind whenever you suspect you'd both benefit from them knowing. (Do NOT assume others will accurately model your mind without your help, or that it will even occur to them to ask you questions to eliminate their ignorance.) 2) Interpret things people tell you as attempts to create common knowledge for shared benefit, rather than as requests or as presumptions of compliance.
Suppose you’re in a conversation that you’re finding aversive, and you can’t figure out why. Your goal is to procure a rain check.
Here are more examples from my own life:
The burden of honesty is even greater in Tell culture than in Ask culture. To a Guess culture person, I imagine much of the above sounds passive aggressive or manipulative, much worse than the rude bluntness of mere Ask. It’s because Guess people aren’t expecting relentless truth-telling, which is exactly what’s necessary here.
If you’re occasionally dishonest and tell people you want things you don't actually care about--like their comfort or convenience--they’ll learn not to trust you, and the inherent freedom of the system will be lost. They’ll learn that you only pretend to care about them to take advantage of their reciprocity instincts, when in fact you’ll count them as having defected if they respond by stating a preference for protecting their own interests.
Tell culture is cooperation with open source codes.
This kind of trust does not develop overnight. Here is the most useful Tell tactic I know of for developing that trust with a native Ask or Guess. It’s saved me sooooo much time and trouble, and I wish I’d thought of it earlier.
"I'm not asking because I expect you to say ‘yes’. I'm asking because I'm having trouble imagining the inside of your head, and I want to understand better. You are completely free to say ‘no’, or to tell me what you’re thinking right now, and I promise it will be fine." It is amazing how often people quickly stop looking shifty and say 'no' after this, or better yet begin to discuss further details.