Search Results

Chapter 7 offers reflections on the methodology that the book uses. The methodology includes historical and ecumenical study involving the serious probing of historic claims to consensus and the “reception” of those claims in Christian communities. The methodology distinguishes “doctrine” (communal teaching) from “theology” (any critical reflection on religious teachings) and “popular religion” (the actual beliefs of people, whether or not they have been formally affirmed by communities). It concludes with reflections on the difficulty and the possibility of communication and understanding across wide cultural and linguistic boundaries, because cross-cultural understanding is necessary for the claims the book has made.

This chapter describes some of the chapter's author's peregrinations in the liminality of teaching, notably, “the rocks and stones” laid out in large courses for undergraduates all looking for transcendence. The chapter addresses the question: how can “the continuity between external actions and internal states of being” be taught, when the “gulf” the class sees between lofty texts and meditative ideals is analogous to the gulf between the illiterate rites of the thousands of Indian villages and the textual ideals depicted by the tradition? The chapter puts forward a solution and evidence of gains in cultural understanding brought about by this.

The vital role of ‘concept’ as our chief means for expressing an evaluation of our present capacities for semantic diagnosis and control is reviewed, leading to chastened expectations that lie intermediate between the excessive optimism of classical thinking and the radical pessimism endemic to pragmatism. These considerations indicate a crucial need for a temperate form of semantic scepticism within our philosophical thinking, a lesson that the present chapter applies to a number of controversies prominent in current debate. An allied viewpoint is brought to bear upon familiar worries about the role of ‘truth’ in our thinking and the problems involved in ‘understanding’ another culture.

This chapter examines the question of conflict resolution and harmony between cultures in discourse and communication from the Iranian perspective. It argues that the establishment of realistic, proper, and effective communication based on mutual cultural understanding and goodwill would settle many national and international disputes. It also proposes new concepts of appropriate cross-cultural understanding and administrative systems in ways that may lead to cultural reciprocity, transformation and cooperation.

The examination of wars and conflicts of the twenty-first century immediately draws one to the culture and sectarian dimensions of a conflict. Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California convened cultural experts, anthropologists, government officials, and strategic analysts to discuss the impact culture has on both conflict behavior and counterinsurgency environments. A number of the study participants have agreed to share their ideas and insights on the nexus of culture, conflict, and counterinsurgency. The scholars reflect on the following fundamental questions; where and how is culture important in a national security and foreign policy context? Is cultural understanding important, or is it merely a fad? What constitutes cultural data? What frameworks should be used to analyze culture? What are the challenges of cultural data collection and application?

The meaning of culture appears to depend on the culture that defines it. This chapter surveys the various definitions of culture in general and legal culture in particular and sets the stage for the discussion of the complicating effects of cultural diversity in contemporary international arbitral proceedings in the chapters that follow. The chapter takes as its starting point the definition of culture set forth by the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) before noting the many dimensions of culture. It then takes a brief look at cultural in transnational business before offering preliminary thoughts on culture in international arbitration.

This concluding chapter summarizes the major findings of this study and then explores the implications for intercultural understanding and accommodation more generally. Positing a link between interpersonal and structural levels of social behavior and interaction, this chapter argues that the study of achievement of cross-cultural understanding within couple partnerships offers insights to how successful accommodations may occur between different (potentially hostile and unequal) groups. Effective conflict resolution between groups may take place when each of the parties recognizes the boundaries between that which is and is not negotiable, what each group can retain, and what each needs to relinquish. As the United States becomes increasingly multicultural, conceiving of how differences can be negotiated and accommodated without loss and assimilation is crucial.

Facts have a cultural origin. The understanding of facts is culturally ingrained. Different meanings could be attributed to different occurrences by decision-makers coming from different cultural backgrounds. Cultural proximity is important for cultural understanding and the accurate determination of facts. This chapter shows the importance of cultural competence in arbitral fact-finding. It discusses in particular “fact-finding in the fog,” in which the work of Professor John Crook is analyzed, especially his points regarding the preference of international arbitrators to rule on matters in which the facts are undisputed. The discussion also includes sections on culture as fact, and fact as culture; and interpretation and application of law as a cultural practice.

Most of the great European literary historians and intellectual historians of the past century compose their works in response to Communism, fascism, or both. The concerns of the present are in many respects different and accordingly encourage different responses. One option is to investigate the explanatory role of culture, a project that requires the rejection of the standard association of culturalist explanation with conservative politics. A second alternative to the mid-century historians is the recent interest in world literature. Though its conditions of possibility have always included imperialism and international inequality, it does not follow that scholarship on the subject needs to replicate—rather than challenge—the order of things. By attending to language’s formal properties, literary critics might contribute to the advancement of both knowledge and cross-cultural understanding.

Librarians in school, public, and academic contexts have been more outward-facing in their outreach efforts over the past 15 years. Public libraries have connected with school and academic libraries, and more libraries increasingly connect with local organizations and individuals to provide programming. Public film screenings enable public and academic libraries to meet the needs of all people in the community—including those who can’t, don’t, or don’t like to read. Film and media literacy in libraries helps to create communities where ongoing sustained dialogue helps us talk and listen to each other. As we model respectful ways of talking about movies and media, we know that these vital civic competencies can transfer to the home, the family, the workplace, and the community. In some communities, locally created oral histories on video bring people together to share stories, and this form of digital media has cross-generational value for both current and future residents. Libraries can also be an avenue for independent filmmakers to distribute their films. Screening the entries of film contests like the 90-Second Newbery and 60-Second Shakespeare can serve to attract patrons to the library and readers to great literature. Outreach librarianship may also be a matter of marketing and adaptation for survival.

This chapter examines Wittgenstein’s critique of philosophy’s premium on simplicity and generality. Although philosophy overlaps with the sciences, it also leans toward the humanities in the open-ended character of its core issues. Additionally, the author discusses Alasdair MacIntyre’s and Jean-Paul Sartre’s different views on the appeal of stories, and discusses as well how the insights of stories have the same features as those of the humanities in being indexical, prescriptive, and perspectival. The social sciences occupy a midpoint between the natural sciences and humanities, aiming to be descriptive, with high value on collective knowledge. But because they deal with human societies, there are constraints on efforts to minimize indexicality. And, because many issues about human societies cannot be addressed without understanding the viewpoints of individuals in the societies, there are also challenges in minimizing perspectivality and complexity.

This chapter examines Hans Blumenberg's speech “World Pictures and World Models,” which he gave after he was appointed full professor at the University of Gießen in 1960. In the modern age, the scientific world model and the cultural self-understanding are no longer congruent. Philosophy's task is not just to explicate this divergence but also to dismantle remaining monist and exclusive world pictures. Blumenberg then locates philosophy's critical function in reducing total expectations of meaning — even if, as is true for his later works, modernity's loss of meaning may itself be mourned. He explains that the task that falls to philosophy within the association of academic fields can be traced back to its function in the spiritual economy of humans in general. The countless definitions that have been given for philosophy's achievements in its history have a basic formula at their core: philosophy is the emerging consciousness of humans about themselves.

A new discourse on religion in modern societies has established itself in the social sciences and humanities. Perspectives in the social sciences are no longer dominated by the master narrative that claims that religion is waning in significance. The new keywords are now the de-privatization of religion, the return of the Gods, and de-secularization. Instead of assuming a strained relationship between religion and modernity, scholars nowadays emphasize the compatibility of religion and modernity. They also draw attention to the blurred boundaries between tradition and modernity and underline the religious roots of modern institutions and ideas. Faced with such a rejection of secularization theory, the book wishes to hold two questions open. Do we really already know what the dominant tendencies of religious change are in modern societies? Are we in a position to explain these tendencies? The analyses collected in the book are intended to deal with these questions.