Intercultural Personhood
Abstract
Personhood is one of the key problems not only in philosophy and the sciences, but also in different fields of the social life in all countries of the world. The solution of this problem is the starting-point for various further problems concerning personhood’s metaphysical, physical, moral and legal aspects, e.g. discussions in biomedical ethics about abortion, stem-cell research, euthanasia or debates in philosophy and law about human rights, citizenship, equality, liberty, legal person, corporate personhood, etc.
On the one hand, it is necessary to give universal criteria of personhood to distinguish between human beings and animals, between persons and potential persons, between diverse degrees of personhood. On the other hand, it is also important to consider special criteria of personhood that apply within and between different cultures, what might be called intercultural criteria of personhood. This paper offers some reflections on intercultural personhood, its criteria, and possible problems and solutions, particularly in the contemporary context of globalization.
Full Text:
Subscribers OnlyReferences
Catholic Encyclopedia 11. 2011. New York: Robert Appleton Company. Retrieved 2011-03-09.
Chen, G. M. 2005. A model of global communication competence , China Media Research, Vol. 1, No.1, 3-11.
Davies, P. 1983. Remarks on Wittgenstein’s Remark on Frazer’s „The Golden Bough“, in King’s Theological Review 6.
Fretlöh-Thomas, Sigrid. 2001. Interkulturelles Verstehen oder kulturbedingtes Erklaeren: Wittgensteins Kritik an Frazer. pp. 36-44 in Luetterfelds, W. und Salehi, Djavid (Hrsg.): „Wir koennen uns nicht in sie finden. Probleme interkultureller Verständigung und Kooperation“-Wittgenstein-Studien 3-Frankfurt am Main u.a.: Lang.
Hao Nguyen Vu Hao. 2002. The Concept of Man in Wittgenstein’s Language Philosophy. The Anthropological Foundations for Education and Intercultural Understanding, Hamburg: Kovač.
Hegde, R. S. 1998. Swinging the trapeze: The negotiation of identity among Asian Indian immigrant women in the United States. pp.34-55 in: Tanno D. V. & Gonzalez A. (Eds.), Communication and identity across cultures. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Henderson, D. 1988. Wittgenstein’s Descriptivist Aproach to Understanding: Is There a Place for Explanation in Interpretive Accounts? in: Dialectica 42 (1988), p. 105-115.
Kim, Y. Y. 2000. On becoming intercultural. pp.59-67 in Myron, W. L. & Jolene, K. (Eds.), Among us: Essays on identity, belonging, and intercultural competence. New York: Addison Wesley Longman.
Kim, Y. Y. 2001. Becoming intercultural: An integrative theory of communication and cross-cultural adaptation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Kim, Y. Y. 2001. Becoming intercultural: An integrative theory of communication and cross-cultural adaptation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Kim, Y. Y. 2008. Intercultural personhood: Globalization and a way of being. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 32, 359-368.
Kim, Y. Y. 2008. Intercultural personhood: Globalization and a way of being. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 32, 359-368.
Kippenberg, H.G. und Luchesi, B. (Hrsg.). 1978. Magie: Die sozialwissenschaftliche Kontroverse über das Verstehen fremden Denkens, Frankfurt am Main.
Legal Theory Lexicon: Persons and Personhood. 2015. (http://lsolum.typepad.com/legaltheory/2015/01/legal-theory-lexicon-persons-and-personhood.html). Truy cập tháng 3 năm 2015.
List, E. 1980. Zum Problem des Verstehens fremder Kulturen: Wittgensteins Bemerkungen zu J.G. Frazers‘ Golden Bough, in: List, E. u.a. (Hrsg.). Wittgenstein und sein Einfluß auf die gegenwärtige Philosophie, Akten des zweiten internationalen Wittgenstein-Symposiums 1977, Wien.
Luetterfelds, Wilhelm. 2001. Interkulturelles Verstehen in Wittgensteins Konzept von Sprachspiel, Weltbild und Lebensform. pp. 21-22 in: Luetterfelds, W., Roser, A., Raatzsch, R. (Hrsg.). Wittgenstein - Jahrbuch 2000, Frankfurt amMain/Berlin/Bern/Bruxelles/New York/Oxford/Wien.
Person sein. 2015 (http://www.aktion-leben.de/was-wir-wollen/die-hintergruende/person-sein/). Truy cập tháng 3 năm 2015.
The Concept of Personhood. 2015
(http://www.ethics.missouri.edu/personhood.html). Truy cập tháng 3 năm 2015.
The Ethics of Abortion. 2015
(http://www.csus.edu/indiv/g/gaskilld/ethics/Abortion.htm). Truy cập tháng 3 năm 2015.
Ting-Toomey, S. 1988. Intercultural conflict styles: A face-negotiation theory. pp.213-235 in Kim, Y. Y. & Gudykunst, W. B. (Eds.), Theories in intercultural communication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Ting-Toomey, S. 1993. Communicative resourcefulness: An identity negotiation theory. pp.72-111 in R. L. Wiseman & J. Koester (Eds.), Intercultural communication competence. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Ting-Toomey, S. 1998. Facework competence in intercultural conflict: An updated face-negotiation theory. International Journal of intercultural Relations, 22, 187-225.
Ting-Toomey, S. 2005. Identity negotiation theory. pp.211-234 in: Gudykunst, W. B. (Ed.), Theorizing about intercultural communication. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
White, Thomas I. 2010. "Dolphin people". Retrieved 9 December 2010.
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1969. Philosophical Investigations (PI) in: Wittgenstein, Ludwig, Schriften 1, Frankfurt am Main, part II, X.
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1989. On Certainty (Ueber Gewissheit) in: Werkausgabe, Bd. 8, Frankfurt a. M.
Xiao-Dong Dai, Intercultural personhood and identity negotiation
(http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Intercultural+personhood+and+identity+negotiation.-a0215410902). Truy cập tháng 3 năm 2015.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1172/vjossh.v2i2.53
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
=====================================================
TẠP CHÍ KHOA HỌC XÃ HỘI VÀ NHÂN VĂN
Trường Đại học Khoa học Xã hội và Nhân văn
Đại học Quốc gia Hà Nội
ISSN 2354-1172