Multi-collectivity

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Multikollektivität (Latin multi "many"; colligere "together search") refers to the association of a individual to a variety of collectives . So z. For example, one person can be woman, Spanish, German, Bavarian, Catholic, golfer, vegetarian and academic at the same time.

The term illustrates the diversity of individual identity (see also section “ Multicollectivity and Identity ”) and represents an alternative to monocollective identity concepts, which see people as being shaped by only one collective membership (often nationality , ethnicity or religion ). It is therefore mainly used in intercultural discourse .

Conceptual context

The term was systematically introduced by Klaus P. Hansen in 2009 in his foundation of a collective science. It is based on the concept of the collective , which groups individuals with the same characteristic into a unit (e.g. collective of coffee drinkers). Further, so-called standardizations, which together form a culture , can depend on the constitutive characteristic . According to this concept, culture and collective are twin terms that view the same phenomenon from different perspectives.

Multi-collectivity and identity

The multiple affiliation identified by the multicollectivity means that individual identity is not limited to a single affiliation (e.g. nationality, ethnicity, religion, gender), but appears to be additive and complementary. Nevertheless, the individual identity remains unique because, on the one hand, a different combination of affiliations flows into the addition for each person and, on the other hand, the personal weighting of the individual affiliations is different (e.g. one identifies strongly with his professional group, while for the to others, the job is only an onerous, but necessary obligation for a living). Multicollectivity therefore emphasizes the fact that identity is largely formed through contact with reference groups, i.e. emerges from collectivity. Furthermore, the term draws attention to the fact that the individual acts as a link between collectives.

Differentiation from terms from the intercultural and gender discourse

Multicollectivity is to be distinguished from the terms “ interculturality ”, “ hybridity ” and “ multiculturalism ”, especially insofar as they are based on a traditional (or “closed”) concept of culture that collective science is critical of. The traditional concept of culture (and the corresponding conception of individual identity) are based on monocultural activity, i. In other words, the individual is shaped by a single collective affiliation, mostly ethnic or national. The person then appears as a product, e.g. B. nationality or national culture. The problem of this conception is exacerbated if two further premises are added: first, insofar as the one formative culture is presented as homogeneous and static, and second, the character as comprehensive and conclusive.

In addition, it makes sense to distinguish between the terms “ diversity ” and “ intersectionality ”.

Multicollectivity and interculturality

A concept of interculturality based on the traditional concept of culture is based on the assumption that when two people come into contact with each other, communication is difficult as a result of being influenced by different nationalities (or ethnicities) . A French and a German are supposedly strangers to each other and can hardly interact with each other because they should have different values and manners . In contrast, multicollectivity assumes multiple characteristics, so that when individuals come into contact with each other, strange and familiar, i.e. different and identical collective affiliations come into play. While intercultural communication tends to hypostatize strangeness, collective science also looks at similarities. Perhaps the French and the German are both golfers, both work for large corporations, both are men and love fast cars, so that there are enough things in common to be able to communicate with one another - assuming the possibility of linguistic understanding.

Multi-collectivity and hybridity

Hybridity means the mixing of cultures and the resulting creation of something new or third. Someone could settle down as a German in Paris and soon develop a culturally hybrid lifestyle (third) that mixes German and French idiosyncrasies. The concept of hybridity was developed with the intention of representing the openness and dynamics of culture, but operates on the basis of the traditional concept of culture in that the mixing cultures are initially thought of as separate and homogeneous. This basis distinguishes it from the multicollectivity, while both terms share the intention to represent the cultural diverse character of individual identity.

Multicollectivity and multiculturalism

Multicollectivity is not the same as multiculturalism. Firstly, multicollectivity describes the constitution of an individual, while multiculturalism describes that of a society . Second, multicollectivity and multiculturalism assume different basic assumptions about social reality. Multiculturalism (at least the so-called “static” multiculturalism) means the social coexistence of different national, ethnic, religious or linguistic cultures that are once again thought of as homogeneous. Since collective science does not only approve of collectives of this type of culture, for them every modern society is a polycollective structure made up of the most varied of cultures or collectives. From this point of view, z. B. Germany, even without recourse to migrants, a multicultural mixture mediated through the multicollectivity of individuals, since z. B. Academic, artisan, worker, youth, regional cultures (etc.) exist side by side, with and mixed up.

Multicollectivity and diversity

Diversity - like multiculturalism - refers to the large number of collectives in a society, but is also applied to organizations (e.g. companies ). Like multicollectivity, diversity goes beyond the classic dimensions of multiculturalism (nationality, ethnicity, etc.). B. “ age ”, “ disability ” or “ sexual orientation ”. To the extent that so-called diversity management focuses on these individual collectives as target groups (e.g. advancement of women without considering other categories such as “age” or “disability”), the diversity concept - unlike multicollectivity - runs the risk of disregarding the multiple affiliations of individuals .

Multicollectivity and intersectionality

Intersectionality, on the other hand, presupposes individual multiple membership, but primarily refers to the possibility of being discriminated against in different ways and by different actors (e.g. as a black, homosexual woman). In addition, the concept of intersectionality is primarily linked to the gender discourse and is therefore less neutral in terms of the history of the concept than multicollectivity.

Multi-collectivity and network

Multicollectivity can also be clearly distinguished from the term network, which - unlike the concepts listed under 3 - is not closely related to intercultural or gender discourse. While the term collective is based on commonalities between individuals, the concept of network is based on the relationships (especially the intended ones) between individuals or collectives that are thought to be different. From the point of view of collective science, multi-collectivity plays a role in such relationships. When individuals with the same collective affiliations form a network, these can have an impact, e.g. B. make the contacts more durable. Network theory and collective science both demonstrate the interconnectedness of everyone with everyone, but do so on different grounds. While the basis of the network is social contacts, collective science emphasizes the connection of all collectives through the multicollectivity of individuals. When a Protestant baker joins a tennis club, he brings his religion- and profession-specific collective affiliations into the new collective (so-called "precollective elements"), which initially latently and largely unconsciously creates a connection between the three collectives.

Normative use

The multicollectivity approach provides a new view of cohesion in social groups. The individual brings only part of his person and personality into any collectivity. According to Hansen, the multiple positioning of the individual in numerous groups, building on the work of Peter M. Blau , leads to a network-like stability of larger group contexts. Knowing different points of view could also be beneficial for cohesion. Being aware of the multicollectivity - both your own multiple affiliations and the multiple affiliations of the other person - reduces the fears that can otherwise arise from intercultural situations and creates space for common concerns.

If multicollectivity is viewed normatively (as a goal), the result is an evaluation basis for political approaches in which positive evaluations are made of what enables the individual to gain access to more collectives, negative of what prevents or impedes access. In this context, it is pointed out that the radicalization of people goes hand in hand with the restriction of their collectivity, that for example sects and terrorist groups isolate their members and cause them to break off their contacts with other groups as far as possible.

literature

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ see e.g. B. Jürgen Bolten, Intercultural Competence . 5th edition, State Center for Civic Education Thuringia, Erfurt 2012, p. 30 f .; Stefanie Rathje, The Concept of Culture. An application-oriented proposal for a general overhaul . In: Alois Moosmüller (Ed.), Concepts of cultural difference . Waxmann, Münster 2009, pp. 83 ff. (96 ff.).
  2. ↑ Klaus P. Hansen, Culture, Collective, Nation . Stutz, Passau 2009, p. 20 ff.
  3. ↑ cf. Klaus P. Hansen, Culture, Collective, Nation . Stutz, Passau 2009, p. 27.
  4. ↑ cf. Klaus P. Hansen, Culture, Collective, Nation . Stutz, Passau 2009, p. 20.
  5. ↑ Klaus P. Hansen, Culture and Cultural Studies: An Introduction . 4th edition, UTB-Francke, Tübingen / Basel 2011, p. 158 f.
  6. ↑ see e.g. B. Jürgen Bolten, Intercultural Competence . 5. A., State Center for Civic Education Thuringia, Erfurt 2012, pp. 25–27.
  7. ↑ see Stefanie Rathje, Multi-Collective. Key term in modern cultural studies . In: Stephan Wolting (Ed.), Culture and Collective. Festschrift for Klaus P. Hansen . wvb, Berlin 2014, p. 39 ff. (45 ff.).
  8. ↑ Klaus P. Hansen, Culture and Cultural Studies: An Introduction . 4th edition, UTB-Francke, Tübingen / Basel 2011, p. 182 f.
  9. ↑ Klaus P. Hansen, Culture and Cultural Studies: An Introduction . 4th edition, UTB-Francke, Tübingen / Basel 2011, p. 188.
  10. ↑ cf. Stefanie Rathje, multi-collectivity. Key term in modern cultural studies . In: Stephan Wolting (Ed.), Culture and Collective. Festschrift for Klaus P. Hansen . wvb, Berlin 2014, p. 39 ff. (49).
  11. ↑ cf. Klaus P. Hansen, Culture and Cultural Studies: An Introduction . 4th edition, UTB-Francke, Tübingen / Basel 2011, p. 175.
  12. ↑ see Stefanie Rathje, Multi-Collective. Key term in modern cultural studies . In: Stephan Wolting (Ed.), Culture and Collective. Festschrift for Klaus P. Hansen . wvb, Berlin 2014, p. 39 ff. (47).
  13. ↑ see Stefanie Rathje, Multi-Collective. Key term in modern cultural studies . In: Stephan Wolting (Ed.), Culture and Collective. Festschrift for Klaus P. Hansen . wvb, Berlin 2014, p. 39 ff. (51 f ..)
  14. ↑ cf. Klaus P. Hansen, Culture, Collective, Nation . Stutz, Passau 2009, p. 24 (fn. 16).
  15. ↑ cf. Klaus P. Hansen, Culture, Collective, Nation . Stutz, Passau 2009, p. 43 f.
  16. ↑ Quote: “Multi-collectivity is possible because the individual does not exhaust himself in a collective, but only contributes a part of his person and personality.” Klaus Peter Hansen, 2000: Kultur und Kulturwissenschaft. Paderborn: UTB, p. 232. Quoted by: Klaus Peter Hansen, Jan-Christoph Marschelke: Journal for Culture and Collective Studies : Vol. 3 , Research Center for Culture and Collective Studies, transcrip, April 2017, ISBN 978-3-8394-3822 -0 , p. 73 .
  17. ↑ Quote from Klaus P. Hansen: "Interventions for the targeted promotion of the multicollectivity of the organization members, measured as an increase in overlapping collectives within the organization, demonstrably lead to increased loyalty and increased social interaction among the organization members and can mitigate dangerous outgroup effects." based on: Klaus Peter Hansen, Jan-Christoph Marschelke: Journal for Culture and Collective Studies : Vol. 3 , Research Center for Culture and Collective Studies, transcrip, April 2017, ISBN 978-3-8394-3822-0 , pp. 77-79 .
  18. ^ Hansen, Klaus Peter 2000: Culture and cultural studies. Paderborn: UTB, p. 196 f. Quoted by: Stefanie Rathje: The concept of culture - an application-oriented proposal for a general overhaul. Retrieved December 17, 2017 . Also published in Moosmüller, Alois (ed.): “Concepts of cultural difference” - Munich contributions to intercultural communication. Munich 2009.
  19. ^ Hansen, Klaus Peter 2000: Culture and cultural studies. Paderborn: UTB, p. 232. Quoted by: Stefanie Rathje: The concept of culture - an application-oriented proposal for a general overhaul. Retrieved December 17, 2017 . Also published in Moosmüller, Alois (ed.): “Concepts of cultural difference” - Munich contributions to intercultural communication. Munich 2009.
  20. ↑ Arjan Verdooren: Taking Multiplicity Seriously: Towards new Approaches for Intercultural practitioners. Taking Diversity Seriously: New Approaches for Intercultural Practitioners. In: interculture journal 13/23. 2014, accessed on April 26, 2020 (English): "Recognizing one's own multicollectivity as well as others", brings the possibility of approaching a situation from different roles and identities, as well as addressing different roles and identities in the other person. This not only reduces the anxiety and uncertainty in intercultural situations, as Gudykunst and Kim have shown, it also creates the space for mutual concerns. ” P. 20. Translated:“ To be aware of one's own multicollectivity, as well as that of others , makes it possible to approach a situation from different roles and identities and at the same time to address several roles and identities in the other person. This not only reduces fears and insecurities that may be associated with intercultural situations, as Gudykunst and Kim have shown, but also creates a space for common concerns. "
  21. ↑ Stefanie Rathje: The concept of culture. An application-oriented suggestion for a general overhaul , pp. 102–103 . In: Alois Moosmüller, Concepts of cultural difference , Waxmann Verlag, 2009, ISBN 978-3-8309-7218-1 , pp. 83 ff.