Institute of Sociology NASU

Theoretical research program of transculturality: the history of formation, problems and prospects

stmm. 2022 (4): 143-161

DOI https://doi.org/10.15407/sociology2022.04.143

NATALIA OTRESHKO, Doctor of Sciences in Sociology, Leading Research Fellow at the Department of History and Theory of Sociology, Institute of Sociology, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine (12, Shovkovychna St., Kyiv, 01021)

otreshkon@gmail.com

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9563-692X

In the article, there are investigated the concept and practices of transculturalism in the global world, its features and differences from the multicultural practices of developed Western countries. The first important feature of transculturalism as a new ethics is that both scientists and politicians realize the need for a purely rational (pragmatic) form of combining the goals and means of cultural coexistence. It is in rational, pragmatic dimensions that modern scientists and politicians are looking for possible ways of combining excellent value and behavioral rules without threatening the civilized world. The second important aspect of the peculiar content of the latest forms of transculturality is closely related to the social nature of a person, which is inherently based on the identification of oneself as an individual only through the prism of the reflected Other. One of the main signs of the change in the picture of the world in modern sciences is the formulation of the principles of non-classical reality based on the study of the concepts of everyday life and the theory of communications in social phenomenology. If we consider that in the modern picture of the world communication between "Own and Other" is gaining more and more importance, then in this sense it can be considered that the main feature of the cultural reality of today is not the culture as a system of values in its classical sense, but rather the cultural border and its constant crossing. Transculture is a new symbolic habitat for the human race that is about as much about culture in the traditional sense as culture is about nature.

Keywords: transculturality, multiculturalism, globalization, paradigms of scientific knowledge

References

Agamben, G. (2008). Homo sacer. Suwerenna władza i nagie życie / Tłum.: M. Salwa. Warszawa: Prószyński i S-ka.

Appadurai, A. (Ed.) (2001). Globalization. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Asad, T. (1986). The concept of cultural translation in British social anthropology. In: J. Clifford, G. E. Marcus (Eds.), Writing Culture. The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Bachmann-Medick, D. (2014). The Trans/National Study of Culture. A Translational Perspective. Boston, MA: De Gruyter.

Bhabha, H. K. (1994). The Location of Culture. London, New York: Routledge.

Deleuze, G., Guattari, F. (1987). A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia / Trans.: B. Massumi. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

Coronil, F., (1995). Introduction to the Duke University Press Edition. Transculturation and the Politics of Theory: Countering the Center, Cuban Counterpoint. In: F. Ortiz, Cuban Counterpoint: Tobacco and Sugar (pp. IX–LVI). Durham, London: Duke University Press.

Foucault, M. (2002 [1969]). The Archaeology of Knowledge. London, New York: Routledge.

Hannerz, U. (1996). Transnational Connections. Culture, People, Places. London: Routledge.

Inda, J. X., Rosaldo, R. (2007). Tracking global flows. In: J.X. Inda, R. Rosaldo (Eds.), Anthropology of Globalization (pp. 26–47). Oxford: Blackwell.

Kuhn, T. S. (2012 [1962]). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the Social. An Introduction to ActorNetwork-Theory. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.

Marcus, G. E. (1995). Ethnography in/of the world system: the emergence of multi-sited ethnography. Annual Review of Anthropology, 24, 95–117.

Mercer, K. (1990). Black art and the burden of representation. Third Text, 10(4), 61–78.

Mignolo, W. D., Tlostanova, M. (2006). Theorizing from the Borders: Shifting to Geo- and Body-Politics of Knowledge. European Journal of Social Theory, 9(1), 205–221.

Ortiz, F. (1995 [1940]). Cuban Counterpoint. Tobacco and Sugar. Durham, NC, London: Duke University Press.

Pollock, S. (2016). Areas, disciplines, and the goals of inquiry. The Journal of Asian Studies, 75(4), 913–28.

Pratt, M. L. (1992). Imperial Eyes. Travel Writing and Transculturation. London: Routledge.

Said, E. (1978). Orientalism. New York: Harmondsworth.

Schachtner, C. (2015). Transculturality in the internet: culture flows and virtual publics. Current Sociology, 63(2): 228–43.

Sheller, M. (2017). From spatial turn to mobilities turn. Current Sociology, 65(4), 623–39.

Sheller, M., Urry, J. (2006). The new mobilities paradigm. Environment and Planning, 38(2), 207–26. Retrieved from: http://journals.sagepub. com/doi/abs/10.1068/a37268.

Viehbeck, M. (Ed.) (2017). Transcultural Encounters in the Himalayan Borderlands. Kalimpong as “Contact Zone”. Heidelberg: Heidelberg University Publishing

Welsch, W. (1992). Transkulturalitat — Lebensformen nach der Auflosung der Kulturen. Information Philosophie, 2, 5–20.

Welsch, W. (1996). Transculturality — the form of cultures today. In: K. Bethanien (Ed.), Le Shuttle: Tunnelrealitaten Paris-London-Berlin (pp. 15–30). Berlin: Kunstlerhaus Bethanien.

Welsch, W. (1999). Transculturality — the puzzling form of cultures today. In: M. Featherstone, S. Lash (Eds.), Spaces of Culture: City, Nation, World (pp. 194–213). London: Sage.

Received 22.08.2022