David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
International Journal of Philosophical Studies 4 (2):292 – 308 (1996)
Abstract I wish to discuss the constitutive conditions ? and aporias ? of the representations of the other in philosophy, sociology and cultural studies. In so doing, I show that crucial to the problem of ?tolerance? is the answer to such questions as: How do we represent the stranger and the other? How does this representation come into being? How can it ? in given instances ? be changed? I shall suggest that the arts may play a decisive role in this process. In this paper I shall attempt to outline a double thesis: (a) the philosophical theory of the experience of something other requires the challenge of ethnology as the science of the stranger; and (b) conversely, however, ethnology itself requires a theory of cultural strangeness, which although always presupposed is never developed. I shall pursue this thesis in three stages. In the first section, I shall say something about the philosophical study of the other and its latent affinity with ethnology. In the second section, I shall take some key terms from the current dispute within ethnology over methodology, and attempt to show that the experience of something other (alien) requires a medium to express, or rather to describe, this experience. This problem of ethnographic depiction and description, lying between science and art; and the suggested solutions to this problem, developed particularly by postmodern American cultural?anthropology, namely an aesthetisization without art, leads to the third section of this paper. This provokes the following question: what does art ? that moment which remains hidden within the contemporary ethnological discussion ? have to offer to our understanding of the (cultural) other? Further, we may ask, as paradoxical as it may at first sound, whether it is precisely from art, perhaps indeed only from art, that the way is to be found leading towards that which hasn't yet been problematized in all these contemporary intercultural debates: an ethic of intercultural understanding as the most important precondition for intercultural tolerance or toleration
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Karsten J. Struhl (2010). No (More) Philosophy Without Cross-Cultural Philosophy. Philosophy Compass 5 (4):287-295.
Richard Wilson (ed.) (1997). Human Rights, Culture and Context: Anthropological Perspectives. Pluto Press.
Paul Healy (2000). Self-Other Relations and the Rationality of Cultures. Philosophy and Social Criticism 26 (6):61-83.
M. Karmasin (2002). Towards a Meta Ethics of Culture – Halfway to a Theory of Metanorms. Journal of Business Ethics 39 (4):337 - 346.
Wilfried Van Damme (1996). Beauty in Context: Towards an Anthropological Approach to Aesthetics. E.J. Brill.
Jeremy Coote (ed.) (1994). Anthropology, Art, and Aesthetics. Clarendon Press.
Carola Sandbacka (1987). Understanding Other Cultures: Studies in the Philosophical Problems of Cross-Cultural Interpretation. Distributed by Akateeminen Kirjakauppa.
Added to index2009-02-01
Total downloads10 ( #220,891 of 1,707,807 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #352,883 of 1,707,807 )
How can I increase my downloads?