The cosmopolitan strategy of intercultural dialogue | Tomsk State University Journal of Cultural Studies and Art History. 2017. № 26. DOI: 10.17223/22220836/26/1

The cosmopolitan strategy of intercultural dialogue

This article is devoted to the study of the cosmopolitan approach to defining the strategy of inter-cultural dialogue, presented in the scientific literature, the works of such scholars as William Beck, Jurgen Habermas, Z. Bauman, Giddens, M. Nussbaum, etc. For these authors characterized criticism of multiculturalism as a strategy which until recently was seen as an effective program for the adaptation of migrants and reduce tensions in interethnic relations. According to these authors, in practice multi-culturalism has not only contributed to a constructive solution of the problem of intercultural dialogue, but, on the contrary, did this dialogue impossible. And one of the inefficiencies of multiculturalism was his inability to adequately assess events occurring in the world. Multiculturalism - the enemy of individualization, he sees the individual in the first place, as a member of a cultural group. An individual conceived in territorial-hierarchical, ethno-political units. Cosmopolitanism is based on a different vision of social reality. It is not positioning culture as a nationally homogeneous. Cosmopolitanization modern world leads to a blurring of boundaries, one person is simultaneously a member of different, geographically separated communities. In this study found the use of the method of comparative analysis of the cosmopolitan and multicultural strategies for intercultural dialogue. This comparison allowed to demonstrate the transformation of philosophical bases of research of cultural diversity issues. The author compares these policies on three grounds: the relation to cultural diversity, communication capabilities, vision of solving to the problem of recognition of the Other. As a result, the following conclusions were made. Multiculturalism sees intercultural dialogue as a dialogue "collective units" and, ultimately, it builds it as intergroup communication, where We are building a relationship with Others. Cosmopolitanism determines fundamentally different foundation of intercultural dialogue. The cosmopolitan project is built on the recognition of human rights priority over the interests of the ethnic or cultural group. This priority is not only seen as a guarantee of human rights, but also as a guarantee alleviate intercultural dialogue. Representatives of the cosmopolitan approach to understanding the problems of intercultural dialogue believe that reconciling cultural differences are possible on the basis of human rights strategies. This strategy implies indifference to the grounds of otherness (cultural, ethnic, religious), while recognizing the other as individuals and support other cultural meanings.

Download file
Counter downloads: 315

Keywords

космополитизм, мультикультурализм, диалог, Другой, признание, культура, cosmopolitanism, multiculturalism, dialogue Another, recognition, culture

Authors

NameOrganizationE-mail
Avanesova Elena G.Tomsk State Universityavanesovafsf@yandex.ru
Всего: 1

References

Меркель заявила о провале мультикультурализма [Электронный ресурс]. URL: http://www.bbc.co.uk/russian/international/2010/10/101016_merkel_multiculturalism_failed.shtml (датаобращения: 11.11.2016).
Ищенко Е. Познание Другого - эпистемологические проблемы и социокультурные аппликации // Логос. Философско-литературный журнал. 2005. № 4 (49). С. 156.
Бек У. Космополитическое мировоззрение. М.: Центр исследований постиндустриального общества, 2008. 308 с.
Бек У. Живя в мировом обществе риска и считаясь с ним. Космополитический поворот // Полис. 2012. № 5. С. 44-58.
Орнатская Л.А. Межкультурный диалог: проблемы и перспективы исследования // Вестник Санкт-Петербургского университета. Серия 6. 2014. Вып. 1. С. 48-60.
Бек У. Власть и её оппоненты в эпоху глобализации. Новая всемирно-политическая экономия. М.: Прогресс-Традиция, Издательский дом «Территория будущего», 2007. 464 с.
Бенхабиб С. Притязания культуры. Равенство и разнообразие в глобальную эру. М.: Логос, 2003. 350 с.
Нуссбаум М. Ответ критикам // Логос. 2006. № 2 (53). С. 132-140.
Гидденс Э. Что завтра: фундаментализм или солидарность [Электронный ресурс]. URL: http://magazines.russ.ru/oz/2003/1/2003_01_05.html (дата обращения: 11.11.2016).
Бек У. Трансформация политики и государства в эпоху глобализации [Электронный ресурс]. URL: http://www.reporter.by/media/library/Bek Ulrikh_Transformacija_politiki_i_gosu-darstva_v_ehpokhu_globalizacii.doc (дата обращения: 11.11.2016).
Дальмайр Ф. Космополитизм : в поисках космоса // Полис. 2012. № 5. С. 59-76.
 The cosmopolitan strategy of intercultural dialogue | Tomsk State University Journal of Cultural Studies and Art History. 2017. № 26. DOI: 10.17223/22220836/26/1

The cosmopolitan strategy of intercultural dialogue | Tomsk State University Journal of Cultural Studies and Art History. 2017. № 26. DOI: 10.17223/22220836/26/1

Download full-text version
Counter downloads: 2336