Culturality

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The term culturality is derived from the adjective cultural . Due to cultural differences, different thought patterns, questions etc. develop in philosophy , sociology and other humanities . These differences justify the discourse within the framework of “ intercultural philosophy ”. One therefore understands “culturality” itself as a description of difference. The “inter” of intercultural indicates that these differences are related to one another.

Culture and cultural behavior

Diverse definitions of “ culture ” do not make it easier to understand. Kroeber and Kluckhohn define in Culture: A Critical Review of Concepts and Definitions. New York: Vintage 1963 164 different meanings of "Culture".

If one speaks of culture in everyday life, this usually refers to so-called “cultural events” such as theater, art etc. - mostly treated in the media under the title “cultural news”. In contrast, areas such as sport and politics, work and leisure do not come under the concept of culture. If one looks at the formation of society from the aspect of cultural development, then one must assume that all social characteristics, as well as the sports, politics, work and leisure mentioned above fall under the concept of culture and thus part of the “culture” of society represent.

The concept of culture

The word culture comes from the Latin “cultura”, which itself is derived from “colere: tilling, planting” and thus originally represents an activity that creates nature, as was the rule in the times of agriculture and subsistence farming. From this point of view it can also be understood that the conditions for arable farming (earth, weather, environment) had a great influence on the way of (life) organization and thus on the development of society.

For a long time, this concept of culture only meant creative activities, but in modern usage the understanding of culture has shifted to the view of a cultural state. This concept of culture describes a state that has been structured in a certain way as a result of successful behavior in dealing with the environment. These structures are therefore also a prerequisite for further changes in interaction with the environment. Humberto Maturana speaks in connection with a structure-determined system (= in this case a certain "culture") and the environment (everything outside of this certain "culture") of "structural coupling" and "structural drifting"

This “cultura creata quae creat” - the created culture that creates at the same time - is thus to be regarded as dynamic and static at the same time - in a certain relation to one another.

So we cannot just speak of culture in the singular, but rather, one must speak of “cultures” that have developed different modes of behavior and norms. In addition to its descriptive function, the concept of culture also has an evaluative function. “Being different” (difference) leads to conflicts regarding norms and behavior.

Man as a cultural being

Abd al-Rahman Ibn Khaldun (1332 Tunis - 1406 Cairo) was the first to deal scientifically with the concept of culture and to examine the diversity of culture in people's social structures and recognize it as a necessity of life. He finds a method that is supposed to make it possible to recognize improbable and untrue traditions and thus researches what drives people to shape nature and how this request shapes human societies. For Ibn Khaldun man is by nature a cultural being. Human societies are inevitably necessary because individual individuals would have no chance of survival. These societies develop differently under the influence of the geographical and climatic conditions to which they are subjected.

And these societies, like individuals, have a time of growth and death. Ibn Khaldun assumes 4 generations = 4 × 30 years = 120 years as the lifespan. "The central thesis of the rhythmic rise and decline of a society due to a community-building force, the " asabija " , is carried out by him in an actually universal historical manner for the entire world known to him and is still influential in the Islamic area today." Ibn Khaldun continues with this the first attempt to grasp culturality.

Self and external attributions

As an element of a culturally shaped social system, people tend to be ascribed to themselves and others. This is shown by Elmar Holenstein with his parable of the Swiss Japanese. To this end, he changes a text by Peter Bichsel in which he describes the differences between Germany and Switzerland in communication, replacing references to Switzerland with references to Japan and, accordingly, references to Germany with Europe. This text has been recited and quoted several times in Europe and Japan, no one doubted its representation. He wanted to show that the variations do not differ between different cultures as well as within one culture (Europe). Although cultural differences can also be assumed within Europe.

Difference as deficiency

An assessment of “being different” as inferior or inadequate can often be found in the history of the colonization of the world by Europe. The Portuguese colonization of Brazil meant that the way of looking at and evaluating Brazilian societies was measured against the language. The finding that the sounds "F", "L" and "R" were unknown to these people led to the assumption that these societies could not be civilized, because they lacked three bases for civilization from the Portuguese perspective. "Fides, Lex and Rex" - Faith, Law and King.

Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel had established that black Africans (he called them “negroes”) were different and therefore different. “The [...] represents the natural man in all his wildness and unrestrainedness; from all reverence and morality, from what is called feeling, one has to abstract if one wants to understand it correctly: there is nothing reminiscent of the human to be found in this character. "

In contrast to this, Elmar Holenstein speaks in his lecture of October 2002 of the impressive linguistic ability and multilingualism of black Africans and of the fact that the social and philosophical competence of all people is determined solely by the ability of the first, second and third order ideas. (1st order - I think / 2nd order - I think what you think / 3rd order I think what you think I think)

Culturality in Philosophical Thought

The dilemma of the culturality of philosophy is expressed in different cultures in the form of different evaluations, basic attitudes, questions ... This dilemma results in:

Four theses on the position and task of philosophy in a cultural context

Thesis 1: Culture and the history of philosophy are primarily Eurocentric . - The presentation of philosophy in modern times is occidental, Greek and is based on the questions of being ( ontology ), reality ( epistemology ) and ought ( ethics ).
If this position is correct, then the problem arises that philosophy becomes a kind of ethnophilosophy , a regional philosophy and cannot be viewed as the philosophy of humanity. The basic questions would be presented differently in different regions of the world.

Thesis 2: Philosophy tends towards universally valid forms of expression. - A problem arises from the assumption that philosophy is not shaped universally, but culturally, even if philosophers generally argue in a generalist way and formulate it both timeless and placeless.
Philosophy is always culturally anchored - the tendency towards universality creates a dilemma of culturalism. Johan Galtung says: “It would have been useful if Kant had examined his own limitations more closely in examining the limitations of the human mind. His, not in a personal sense, but - his - as part of a nation, a class, a tradition, a civilization and the like. But it was not an age of comparative studies to measure one civilization against another point by point. "

Thesis 3: The expansion of the cultural horizon of the history of philosophy is necessary and also possible. - A generic concept of philosophy is required for this.

Thesis 4: The awareness of the superiority of European traditional philosophy can be criticized and should also be criticized.

Styles of social sciences

According to Johan Galtung, there are four styles of doing social sciences. It describes the levels of civilization on which sociology and philosophy are practiced. In scientific investigations that are undertaken in order to recognize and understand reality, after analyzing and forming a theory, one's own conditions for research are analyzed and then the theses and analyzes of others are commented on and compared.

When considering and commenting on other theses, these four styles of science emerge; specific questions are asked:
1. Saxon (English): How can you prove the thesis?
2. Teutonic (German): How do you derive the thesis?
3. Gaulish (French): How do you express this in good French?
4. Nipponisch (Japanese): Who is your teacher, what is your tradition?

The influence of language

Galtung emphasizes that language has a decisive influence on the way we think and understand. In this context it should be mentioned that the view has been expressed several times that Kant's Critique of Pure Reason is easier to understand for people with a German mother tongue in English.

“[…] It has been said that a German can understand Kant's Critique of Pure Reason only if he reads it in English. Obviously, an English translation makes it necessary to transform the long Kantian sentences into simple, short sentences. ”

“[…] It is said that a German understands the criticism of Kant's pure reason when he reads it in English. Obviously, the English translation makes it necessary to convert the long sentences into simple, short sentences. "

Language as the basis and at the same time the expression of cultures and thus cultural differences is itself subject to a historical process of change that can be observed. The question of the understanding of historical texts, which may have been translated several times, always allows culturally differentiated approaches from several dimensions. The fact that words can also have differentiated meanings can be made clear from Hegel's dialectic and the concept of "fuss":

  • "Cancel" in the sense of negate / negare, great,
  • "To cancel" in the sense of preserve / conservare,
  • "To lift" in the sense of to lift / elevare.

In the case of the ambiguity of terms in one language, additional cultural differences arise for people with a different mother tongue.

Self-reflection of philosophy

One of the tasks of philosophy is to become aware of its culturality, since it is not possible to philosophize outside of culture. Culturality is to be understood as a difference.

Culturality demands the following orientation from intercultural philosophy:
- Intercultural philosophy should analyze implicit, culturally determined modes of thinking.
- Intercultural philosophy should criticize stereotypes of the perception of oneself and others.
- Intercultural philosophy should promote openness and understanding.
- Intercultural philosophy should consist of mutual enlightenment.
- Intercultural philosophy can and should promote humanity and peace.

literature

  • Andreas Arndt, Wilhelm Raimund Beyer , Karol Bal, Henning Ottmann: Hegel Yearbook. Akademie Verlag, Berlin 1995.
  • Johan Galtung : structure, culture and intellectual style. A comparative essay on Sachsonian, Teutonic, Gallic, and Nippon science. In: Alois Wierlacher (ed.): The foreign and the own: Prolegomena to an intercultural German studies. Iudicium-Verlag, Munich 1985, pp. 151-196.
  • Comparative culture philosophy. Chinese images, Japanese examples, Swiss conditions. In: Elmar Holenstein : Cultural-Philosophical Perspectives. Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt / M. 1998, pp. 346-371.
  • Anton Hügli , Poul Lübcke (Ed.): Philosophielexikon. Rowohlt, Hamburg 2005.
  • Humberto Maturana , Varela Francisco : The Tree of Knowledge. The biological roots of human knowledge. Scherz, Bern / Munich / Vienna 1987.
  • Claude Shannon : The Redundancy of English. In: Claus Pias , Joseph Vogl (eds.): Cybernetik / Cybernetics. Volume 1. diaphanes, Zurich / Berlin 2003.
  • Franz Martin Wimmer : Intercultural Philosophy. An introduction. Facultas, Vienna 2004, ISBN 3-8252-2470-8 .
  • Franz Martin Wimmer: Considerations on the question of standards of cultural development. In: JEP. Journal for Development Policy. 20, No. 3 (2004), pp. 11-45.

Web links

  • Elmar Holenstein: Beginnings of Philosophy , Lecture Munich October 2002 audiothek.philo.at September 13, 2010.
  • Hakan Gürses: Culture is political. On interculturality in political adult education 2008 The culturality of politics, the political in culture PDF 13 September 2010.
  • Franz Martin Wimmer: Intercultural Philosophy - Theory and History (Internet edition 2001) List of PDF files September 13, 2010.

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ cf. Humberto Maturana, Francisco Varela: The Tree of Knowledge. The biological roots of human knowledge. Scherz, Bern / Munich / Vienna 1987, p. 251 ff.
  2. ↑ cf. Comparative culture philosophy. Chinese images, Japanese examples, Swiss conditions. In: Elmar Holenstein: Cultural-Philosophical Perspectives. Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt / M. 1998, pp. 360-362.
  3. ↑ cf. Franz Martin Wimmer: Considerations on the question of standards of cultural development. In: JEP. Journal for Development Policy. 20, No. 3 (2004), pp. 11-45.
  4. ^ Andreas Arndt, Wilhelm Raimund Beyer, Karol Bal, Henning Ottmann: Hegel year book. Akademie Verlag, Berlin 1995, p. 342.
  5. ↑ Elmar Holenstein: Beginnings of Philosophy. Lecture Munich October 2002 audiothek.philo.at  ( page no longer available , search in web archives )  Info: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.@1@ 2Template: Toter Link / audiothek.philo.at  
  6. ^ Johan Galtung: Structure, Culture and Intellectual Style. A comparative essay on Sachsonian, Teutonic, Gallic, and Nippon science. In: Alois Wierlacher (ed.): The foreign and the own: Prolegomena to an intercultural German studies. Iudicium-Verlag, Munich 1985, pp. 151-196, footnote 4.
  7. ↑ Cf. Johan Galtung: Structure, Culture and Intellectual Style. A comparative essay on Sachsonian, Teutonic, Gallic, and Nippon science. In: Alois Wierlacher (ed.): The foreign and the own: Prolegomena to an intercultural German studies. Iudicium-Verlag, Munich 1985, pp. 151-196.
  8. ^ Claude Shannon: The Redundancy of English. In: Claus Pias, Joseph Vogl (eds.): Cybernetik / Cybernetics. Volume 1. diaphanes, Zurich / Berlin 2003 (first 1950), p. 263.
  9. ↑ Cf. Humberto Maturana, Francisco Varela: The tree of knowledge. The biological roots of human knowledge. Scherz, Bern / Munich / Vienna 1987, pp. 224–229.
  10. ↑ Cf. Anton Hügli, Poul Lübcke (Hrsg.): Philosophielexikon. Rowohlt, Hamburg 2005, p. 65.
  • Franz Martin Wimmer: Intercultural Philosophy. An introduction. Facultas Vienna 2004, ISBN 3-8252-2470-8 .
  1. ↑ a b p. 43.
  2. ↑ p. 45.
  3. ↑ cf. P. 46.
  4. ↑ p. 242.
  5. ↑ a b p. 134.