UDC 130.2:005.936.3
Yevheniia Bilchenko
National Pedagogical Dragomanov University, Kyiv
ORCID 0000-0001-9662-0594
DOI: https://doi.org/10.37627/2311-9489-16-2019-2.81-90
Keywords: intercultural communication, Other, universalism, particularism, globalism, multiculturalism, modernity.
Abstract. The article deals with a comparative analysis of three key models of intercultural communication that have developed in the contemporary culturological discourse – dialogical, phenomenological, and critical ones. The first is identified as modern, the second is as postmodern, and the third is as neo-modern. The dialogical model is characterized by an orientation to the ontological presence of the Other as a source of self-identification. In its maximum manifestation, it leads to universalism and unification in globalism. The phenomenological model is characterized by an orientation to the ontic presence of the Other as an imaginary image. In its maximum manifestation, it leads to particularism and relativization in multiculturalism. Globalism and multiculturalism, as patterns of modernity and postmodernity, are seen as different manifestations of one concept of Western rationality, modernity, which leads to the repression of the Other. A radical break with modernity is the critical theory (Freudo-Marxism), which declares the ontological absence of the Other as the basic existential trauma of the subject in the symbolic field of culture. Through the prism of the critical model, the dialogic and phenomenological models of the Other are interpreted as projections of the desires of Ego and are deconstructed toward the detection of the original trauma. Overcoming this trauma should contribute to the removal of typical oppositions of Western society.
Author Biography.
Yevheniia Bilchenko, Doctor of Cultural Studies, Associate Professor, National Pedagogical Dragomanov University, Kyiv.
yevzhik80@gmail.com
References:
Althusser, L. (2006). Za Marksa [Pour Marx]. Translated by A. V. Denezhkyna (Ed.). Moscow: Praksys. (in Russian)
Baudrillard, J. (1983). Ecstasy of Communication. The Anti-Aesthetic: Essays on Postmodern Culture. Port Townsend, р. 126–133.
Bourdieu, P. (2005). Sociologija social’nogo prostranstva [Sociologie de l’espace social]. Translated by N. A. Shmatko (Ed.). Moscow: Institut jeksperimental’noj psihologii; St. Petersburg: Aleteiia, p. 244. (in Russian)
Bourriaud, N. (2009). The Radicant. Tate Britain, 3 februari t/m 26 april. Sternberg Press. Retrieved from http://www.metropolism.org/magazine/2009-no1/een-archipel-van-lokale-reacties/
Buber, M. (1992) Pervodystantsyia y otnoshenye [First distance and attitude]. M. Y. Levyna (Ed.). In Kultury v dyalohe. Ekaterynburh: Nauka, pp. 126 – 136. (in Russian)
Chanhieva, F. Ju. (2012). Rol’ kul’tury v chelovecheskom progresse. [The Role of Culture in Human Progress]. Bulletin of the Russian State Humanitarian University. Series Economics. Management. Right, pp. 58–61. (in Russian)
Geertz, C. (1997). Vlyianye kontseptsyy kultury na kontseptsyiu cheloveka [The Impact of the Concept of Culture on the Concept of Man]. Translated by E. M. Lazareva. In Antolohyia yssledovanyi kultury. Ynterpretatsyia kultury [Culture Research Anthology. Interpretation of cultures]. L. A. Mostova (Ed.). (Vol. 1, pp.115–141). St. Petersburg: Unyversytetskaia knyha. (in Russian)
Harrison, L. (2008). Hlavnaia ystyna lyberalyzma. Kak polytyka mozhet yzmenyt kulturu y spasty ee ot samoi sebia [The Central Liberal Truth: How Politics Can Change a Culture and Save It from Itself]. Translated from English by Boris Pinsker. Moscow: Novoe yzdatelstvo. (in Russian)
Herzogenraf, B. (2005). “Shosse v nikuda”: Linch i Lakan, kino i kul’turnaja patologija [“Highway to Nowhere“: Lynch and Lacan, Cinema and Cultural Pathology]. Kirill Drozdov (Ed.). Russkaia antropolohycheskaia shkola [In: Russian Anthropological School. Proceedings. Issue], (3). Moscow: RHHU. Retrieved from http://euristem.livejournal.com/41151.html. (in Russian)
Joseph, S. & Nye, Jr. (2015, January 20). Evolution of Soft Power Since Fall of the Berlin Wall. Geopolitics. Retrieved from http://www.brinknews.com/the-evolution-of-soft-power-since-the-fall-of-the-berlin-wall/
Kagan, M. S. (1988). Mir obshhenija. Problema mezhsubektnyh otnoshenij. [The world of communication: the problem of intersubjective relationships]. Moscow: Polytyzdat. (in Russian)
Keats, J. (Red.) (2008). Relihiina bahatomanitnist ta mizhkulturna osvita [Religious diversity and intercultural education]. Lviv: ZUKTS. (In Ukrainian)
Lacan, J. (2008). Semynary, Knyha 17: Yznanka psykhoanalyza (1969/70) [Le Seminaire L’envers de la Psychnalyse Livre 17 (1969–1970)]. A. Chernoglazova (Ed.). Moscow: Gnozys; Logos. (in Russian)
Levinas, E. (2000). Sluzhanka i ee gospodin [The Servant and her master]. V. Lapytskoho (Ed.). Blansho M. Ozhydanye zabvenyia. St. Petersburg: Amfora, pp. 134–144. (in Russian)
Lotman, Yu. M. (1989). Problema vyzantyiskoho vlyianyia na russkuiu kulturu v typolohycheskom osveshchenyy. Vyzantyia y Rus [The problem of Byzantine influence on Russian culture in typological coverage. Byzantium and Rus]. G. K. Vagner (Ed.). Moscow: Nauka, pp. 227–235. (in Russian)
Ricœur, P. (2008). Vid psykhoanalizu do pytannia pro «Ia», abo Trydtsiat rokiv filosofskoi pratsi [From Psychoanalysis to the Question of «I», or Thirty Years of Philosophical Work]. Translated by O. M. Syrtsova (Ed.). Filosofska Dumka, (2), pp. 94–123. (In Ukrainian)
Rorty, R. (1996). Sluchainost, yronyia y solydarnost [Randomness, irony and solidarity]. Y. Khestanova, R. Khestanov (Eds.). Moscow: Russkoe fenomenolohycheskoe obshchestvo. (in Russian)
Waldenfels, B. (2002). Vstup do fenomenolohii [Einführung in die Phänomenologie]. Translated by M. D. Kultaieva (Ed.). Kyiv: Alterpers. (In Ukrainian)
Wallgren, T. (2006). Transformative Philosophy: Socrates, Wittgenstein, and the Democratic Spirit of Philosophy. Lanham-Boulder-New-York-Toronto-Oxford: Lexington Books. Retrieved from https://researchportal.helsinki.fi/en/publications/transformative-philosophy-socrates-wittgenstein-and-the-democrati
Wittgenstein, L. (2005). Yzbrannye raboty [Tractatus Logicoophilosophicus]. Translated by V. Rudneva (Ed.). Moscow: Yzdatelskyi dom «Terrytoryia budushcheho». (in Russian)
Zizek, S. (1999). Vozvyshennyj obekt ideologii [The sublime object of ideology]. Translated from English by V. Sofronov (Ed.). Moscow: Khudozhestvennyi zhurnal. (in Russian)
Published: December 2, 2019.
Section: WORLD CULTURE AND ІNTERNATIONAL RELATIONS.