Intercultural Public Intellectual Engagement

T. Modood
{"title":"Intercultural Public Intellectual Engagement","authors":"T. Modood","doi":"10.1515/jcgs-2017-0004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The article firstly examines the different conceptions of dialogue and reason within political theory, especially in the work of Rawls. Secondly we explore multicultural political theorists who have been motivated less by abstract reasoning by a sole reasoner or identical identity-less individuals and more by dialogue. For such multiculturalists, the principles of social justice are not known in advance or simply by reason, but are arrived at by conflict and learning, by dialogue and negotiation in circumstances of inequality and minority-claims making. In response to the multiculturalists, interculturalists allege that multiculturalism is too focused on the macro and the conflictual, and dialogue should be redirected to the micro and the cooperative. Although I welcome the interculturalists’ focus on micro-relations, this does not require abandoning the idea of dialogue at the level of political controversies and public discourses. It is not an either–or choice because groups and intergroup problems exist in society and cannot be simply handled at a micro level of contact, interaction and sociability. The kind of macro-level dialogue that I am speaking of can also be understood as a form of public intellectual engagement that can contribute to societal dialogues.","PeriodicalId":170340,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Citizenship and Globalisation Studies","volume":"337 4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Citizenship and Globalisation Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jcgs-2017-0004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

Abstract The article firstly examines the different conceptions of dialogue and reason within political theory, especially in the work of Rawls. Secondly we explore multicultural political theorists who have been motivated less by abstract reasoning by a sole reasoner or identical identity-less individuals and more by dialogue. For such multiculturalists, the principles of social justice are not known in advance or simply by reason, but are arrived at by conflict and learning, by dialogue and negotiation in circumstances of inequality and minority-claims making. In response to the multiculturalists, interculturalists allege that multiculturalism is too focused on the macro and the conflictual, and dialogue should be redirected to the micro and the cooperative. Although I welcome the interculturalists’ focus on micro-relations, this does not require abandoning the idea of dialogue at the level of political controversies and public discourses. It is not an either–or choice because groups and intergroup problems exist in society and cannot be simply handled at a micro level of contact, interaction and sociability. The kind of macro-level dialogue that I am speaking of can also be understood as a form of public intellectual engagement that can contribute to societal dialogues.
跨文化公共知识参与
本文首先考察了政治理论中,特别是罗尔斯著作中关于对话和理性的不同概念。其次,我们探讨了多元文化政治理论家,他们较少受到单一推理者或相同身份的个体的抽象推理的激励,更多地受到对话的激励。对于这样的多元文化主义者来说,社会正义的原则不是预先知道的,也不是简单地通过理性,而是通过冲突和学习,通过在不平等和少数人提出要求的情况下的对话和谈判达成的。作为对多元文化主义者的回应,跨文化主义者认为多元文化主义过于关注宏观和冲突,对话应该转向微观和合作。虽然我欢迎跨文化主义者对微观关系的关注,但这并不需要放弃在政治争议和公共话语层面进行对话的想法。这不是一个非此即彼的选择,因为群体和群体间的问题存在于社会中,不能简单地在接触、互动和社交的微观层面上处理。我所说的这种宏观层面的对话也可以被理解为一种公共智力参与的形式,它可以促进社会对话。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信