How can conform ourselves to the current era of 'one thought of unanimity' (globalisation)?
Culture does point to particularity, whereas globalisation does certainly mean uniformity.
The history of the west has been the theft of many other particular histories, ever since around 2500 years ago.
The complexity of life consists in the plurality of meanings and perspectives, of meaning and approaches.
Yes,Nora that's exacly it!
Plurality means creation,interaction and cooperation for an higher level of knowledge..
Thanks for you contribution,you're always welcome!
My answer to Carlos Eduardo Maldonado is similar as i said to Nora...
I agree with Carlos Eduardo and Nora —and I celebrate Carlos Gomes’ inquiry—. I would also add that, despite the corpus of studies devoted to the research of globalization, I think an appropriation of the concept by the globalized periphery is still pending. I think of the way that those XVI-XIX Latin American thinkers embraced and appropriated the intellectual Western realm. In terms of communication, they had to convey their thinking adapting to the rhetoric and literate practices of the time. Still, they created distinctive and unique works. That, too is globalization.
Desculpem escrever em português agora,mas creio que a minha ideia acerca da problemática da globalização no contexto latino-americano,pode ser encarada de uma forma semelhante aquela que Santiago Castro-Goméz considerou na sua obra mais relevante, ’Crítica da razão latinoamericana’ (1996). Nela problematiza a teoria da dependência e da culpabilidade histórica do Primeiro Mundo (Europa), bem como a tese (social) do antagonismo de classes. Com a queda do Muro de Berlim e o desfalecimento do comunismo, enquanto metanarrativa histórica, já não se pode falar de um fenómeno ideológico, mas de uma ‘mudança de sensibilidade’ mudança esta que foi geral e universal. Santiago Castro-Gómez caracteriza-a a a partir dos seguintes princípios.
Urge pois reinventar o passado e romper com os ídolos globalistas do prazer efémero,do facilitismo técnico ou do individualismo castrador,os quais ao invés de humanizarem a vida,a destroem de valor e sentido.
Civilização ou barbárie,apetece-me perguntar?!
Globalization has two elements: 1) economic-material-power oriented, and 2) cultural. The first element encompasses the history of colonialism and neo-colonialism. The second element is about internal colonization, taking forms discussed by Franz Fanon. Can multiculturalism enable resistance to globalization at either level. Thus far, it seems not. Are there examples where multiculturalism has served the aims of people engaged in resistance? Those would be useful to know about.
Clifford, i believe that the main question is to find an alternative model to capitalism, which is now a 'plural social fact', and absorbs all the real-life elements.
As noted Gilles Lipovetsky, the 'capitalism artist' got a mixed and hybrid styles, everything becomes 'confused' and manipulable. The question is how can we turn off this dangerous relationship, between 'art' and 'money', or between 'technical' and 'power', or en evbetween 'media coverage' and 'financial interest'!
Carlos, you first asked: "Can the interculturalism philosophy being a credible alternative to the philosophy of globalization?" Now you have introduced a third term: capitalism? Are you equating capitalism with globalization and still asking if interculturalism philosophy is an alternative? Or are you saying that capitalism is so pervasive that it eliminates that as a possible alternative? Most people think of capitalism as a unitary phenomenon that is inescapable. I think of capitalism as a system with components. Each of those components can be changed. But nothing can change if you think of it as a pervasive system that is so powerful that it makes you powerless. So, if you want an alternative, the first question to ask is: What are the points of weakness, where change is possible?
can be a formidable rival rather than an alternative, I think.
Ramkrishna, as you know history develops itself through dialectical cycles.
Before you close the current is already germinating a potential, or rival, as you say!
Franz J. Hinkelammert an important Costa Rican thinker, of German origin, considers possible latino-american and interculturalist alternative to the current model of globalisation, because as he says:
1. A person can not be reduced to a purely economic dimension;
2. We are part of a social community even still fragmented, in which one solidarity is necessary in practical terms, we can not accept that social life was governed by alleged social Darwinists laws or anti-humanism ( "marketcentrism");
3. The complexity and social and cultural diversity of Latin American societies, can not be grasped from any social and abstract theory, even schematic, which has the market as the central nucleus: (“El modelo matemático del equilibrio optimal, precisamente, demuestra que no puede esperarse del automatismo de la iniciativa privada el equilibrio económico y social" ('Ideologías del desarrollo y dialéctica de la historia' 1970: 28 e 29).
4. The privatization of social life goes against the state's tradition in Latin America, from its origins, establishing itself as a protective element of civil society;
5. We should reject the anti-humanism radical based on the idolatry of the market. This does not mean more than a theology (Christian), disguised in neo-liberalism, based on the free play of supply and demand.
Progress is not exacly this utopia!
Onno De Jong, If history does not move in dialectical cycles, which is, after all,your engine? How develops the historical evolution? :-)
What currently witnessing is a matter of power and domination. Certain elites will trying to win the fight for natural resources in order to establish a form of absolute and global power (new world order) .... climate changings are a part of this 'hidden' agenda You know what are the 'chemtrails'?
The question of cycles respects this paradigm of power. Power is cyclical, the protagonists is what changes, such as what Hegel calls the 'world-historical individuals'. History follows the passion for power, which is always carried out by human and unsearchable actions...the fight is cyclical over time!
Reading Oswald Spengler can be a good proposal about this question.
In my opinion,interculturalism is very flexible about understanding different cultures. It defends the plurality and diversity of knowledge!
Agreed, but with one proviso: the alternative must be a positive one. Mere anti-globalization may lead to parochialism, national chauvinism, glorification of the past in toto, etc. Respect for the progressive aspects of all cultures should be the basis of anterculturalism.
Since the globalist philosophy tends to be dogmatic, one-sided and oppressing the free choice of the human being, it can never offer full freedom. The 'aesthetic capitalism' that underlies it only fosters an individualistic conception of life, hedonist and distracting, which is missing an engine and a normative wire and driver. "Living the present with the maximum intensity (emotional)" is the their paradigm.
Is just this ephemeral pleasure of the senses, this emotional voyeurism and consumption, what we expect from life?
- Badges
- Science method
- Similar topics
- Philosophy