The Image of the Other in the Cultural Practices of the Modernity (original) (raw)

Culture as Dialogue

Journal Of Applied Cultural Studies , 2016

The aim of the study is to demonstrate the paradoxicality determining human life. The natural aspiration of the subject is to strive to achieve order, enabling a reasonably satisfying and passably predictable life, guaranteeing the essential sense of security both on an individual and on a social dimension. The ancient writers and thinkers saw the origins of differentiation, and thereby of the impossibility of achieving coherence and order, in the external reality. Views of thinkers of the 19th and 20th centuries show not only a demand for diversity to be taken into consideration, but also reveal their picture of culture as something highly heterogeneous that cannot be reduced to just a single, preferred vision. Multitude of models and values creates the potential for dialogue, which is irregular and spontaneous.

23 Dialogue and Culture: Reflections on the Parameters of Cultural Dialogue

2020

Culture is flux. All cultures are somewhat permeable and hold internal tension. Dialogue between East and the West, or between Hindu and Buddhist cultures cannot a priori assume diametrically opposed cultural agents. Terms such as "inter-faith dialogue," "cultural discourse ," "Hindu-Christian dialogue" were familiarized in recent decades. Here I outline parameters for such conversations derived from cultural dialogue in religious and philosophical sources of classical and medieval India. My approach will be general. Historical examples are excavated to show how diametric-ally opposing parties are constituted in the process of dialogue itself and not located within static cultural subjects that are frozen in time. Can philosophical discourse mirror collective social and cultural dialogue? One problem is that conclusions derived from philosophical observation can have minimal impact on socio-political history. Since texts are products of history and reflect society of that time, text-ual discourse, I argue, helps shape social dialogue. The effects of cultural exchange: fusion, clash, appropriation, subordination, negation, and annihilation are identified in textual history by reading inter-textually across time, not as isolated or frozen units. This requires a bird's-eye-view, rather than a microanalysis of specific texts and events. Whilst reading a chapter or text for philological insight has its own merits, this approach limits recognition of the cultural flux and textual dynamism portrayed by the shifting horizons of writers inside traditions. A single text may obscure transition or fusion of traditions. A lineage might demonstrate deviation from earlier premises if we examine historically contextual forces and factors. Reading textual battles are enlightening in many regards. We can either spill the meta-phoric ink or human blood. Maintaining difference is inherent to our being in the world and it is only a matter of choice over how we intend to institutionalize our difference.

The Boundaries of Intercultural Dialogue in a World " After Babel "

This paper examines the inescapable boundaries of intercultural dialogue in a context of (radical) religious and societal heterogeneity, in which there is no common language. The paper discusses two models of understanding the cultural other: first, Gadamer's idea of a fusion of horizons, and second, Ricoeur's idea of cultural hospitality. Through a critical analysis of Taylor's ideas of understanding the other in her own right, it is shown that the paradigm of a fusion of horizons is only effective for intercultural dialogue as long as the differences between various cultures are not too big. However, this paradigm reaches its boundaries in a context of cultural heterogeneity, because there is no " Esperanto " , i.e. a common language, in which all the ideas, practices and sensitivities of all cultures could be translated without loss. Therefore, Ricoeur's idea to approach the opportunities and boundaries of understanding the cultural other by comparing it with learning a different language is a major step forward, since he stresses the value of cultural hospitality, while at the same time doing justice to the idea that there will always be something untranslatable. The conclusion will be that, although intercultural dialogue confronts humans with inescapable boundaries, communication with and understanding of the cultural other are nevertheless essential, since humans can only understand themselves through the other.

DIALOGUE OF CULTURES: E. HALL AND F. KLUCKHOHN

National Academy of Managerial Staff of Culture and Arts Herald, 2018

This paper aims at highlighting some of the main approaches to intercultural dialogue - E. Hall's cultural factors and F. Kluckhohn and F. Strodtbeck's value orientations theory. The authors have used anthropological integrative approach, comparative analysis, and philosophical hermeneutics. Cultural patterns are largely determined by different reality tunnels: everyone creates his/her own unique reality, which is recognized as the only one "true reality". This makes communication more complicated. Nowadays, global awareness and understanding of other cultures help people to cope with the "difficulties of cultural translation". To avoid the threats to effective intercultural communication, we must recognize that Other doesn't mean Wrong, Other is just Different. It helps to understand the cultural logics behind cultural differences. One-sided perception caused by cultural and historical differences can be overcome by integrating the other models of thinking, as well as by accepting the other "rules" of relations between people, including those, which have arisen under other cultural and historical conditions. This will lead to recognition that different cultural systems do not exclude, but successfully complement and enrich each other. Hall's theory of culture and F. Kluckhohn and F. Strodtbeck's value orientation theory contribute to better understanding of the representatives of other cultures, their attitudes towards the world and ways of communication , as well as promote the ability to be a successful intercultural dialogue's participant.

Categories of Multicultural Dialogue from the Point of View of Contemporary Communication

Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 2013

The perspective of intercultural dialogue seems to be extremely important, especially nowadays, for reflection on culture communication. The paper concerns the changes appearing in understanding of such terms as the Same, the Other, the Different, the Second which constitute thinking on intercultural communication. It seems that the starting point of the discussion should become the perspective outlined by the outstanding Polish writer Ryszard Kapu ci ski in the volume of his essays "This Other". The proposition of the interpretation described in the paper is on one hand connected with the perspective of the philosophy of dialogue, especially with the reflection of Emanuel Levinas and of Polish philosopher and priest Józef Tischner, and on the other with transformations of intercultural dialogue implicated by new media, especially by the networked perspective of Internet. The paper describes reevaluations appearing on the Internet and concerning categories important for this kind of communication. The Network emerges as the place of opening for "the Second" and simultaneously as the space of rejection and exclusion. The analysis of the phenomenon of inter culturally leads to the conclusion that the so-far understanding of categories constituting the intercultural discourse needs to undergo the fundamental transformations and reevaluations. On the place of so-far oppositions there appear new ones, formed i.e. by new technologies. One of them may be the necessity of dialogue between "young" and "old", where only the first group seems to be completely competent participants of networked life, when the second group become "the Others" of cyber-world.

Cultural Pluralism and Cultural Dialogue

Melintas, 2008

kolonialisme, imperialisme dan akulturasi koersif. Dan peradaban akan menjadi beban. Artikel ini menekankan interaksi kultural global yang saling memperkaya dan saling menghaluskan. Kebudayaan adalah sebuah dialog yang lantas menuntut standard kehalusan atau standard peradaban yang juga berragam. Bila peradaban dilihat sebagai berbagai pola ungkap yang berbeda, maka ia bukanlah beban melainkan peluang. Key Words: l l l l Civilization Dynamic Irreplaceable body of values Single standard of perfection Imagining the real Sympathetic l l understanding; domination Exploitation Different refinement l l