FROM GLOBAL INTERESTS TO

CULTURAL VALUES

 A. T. DALFOVO

1. VIEWS ON GLOBALIZATION

            Globalization refers to the interconnection of human activity on a global scale, to the unprecedented flows of capital and labour, technology and skills, ideas and values across State and national boundaries, but in a way that neither States nor nations can adequately control.¹ An appraisal of globalization is problematic and controversial as its meaning is rather elusive. The views on globalization seem to be locked in unresolvable dichotomies for and against it.

            According to many economists, globalization is a natural process which is greatly increasing prosperity around the world. Both developing and industrialized countries benefit from the effects of the shake-up that it involves.² Globalization provides more and better means to defeat poverty, ignorance and desease at world level. The massive production of standard products at global level reduces their cost and allows an increasing number of customers to be reached. Global competition propels a vaster technological progress and more attractive conditions for employment, fostering better living conditions in the world at large. Communications have become easier and faster increasing the possibility of information, learning, education, and development. P. Martin states that positions hostile to globalization are profoundly immoral because they are based on suppressing the aspirations of the Third World in order to preserve the advantages of a specifically Western model of working.³

            According to other analysts instead, globalization is deepening the economic disparities, widening the gap between rich and poor and fostering a lopsided development. Statistics are produced to show that unemployment and inequalities are rising, individuals and groups are marginalized, basic social services are restricted or suppressed.⁴ These negative effects of globalization seem to be hitting Africa in particular. "Globalization is not working for the benefit of the majority of Africans today".⁵ Many people in Sub-Saharan Africa tend to see globalization as the latest form of expansion and consolidation of a "world order" that has the western political and economic powers as its driving force. The impact of globalization has been felt as a renewed colonial aggression in the "logical" line of slavery, colonialism and neo-colonialism with the added danger of being vested in apparently innocent words and ideas such as "global responsibility", "global family", "one humanity" and "new world order".⁶

            The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Report for 1997 contains a sharp critique of the effects on the poorest countries of "unbridled" globalization:  a process occurring "without map or compass". The report underlines the human cost of globalization and points out that the bulk of the benefits accrue to a small and privileged minority. Two years ago, while ten Southern countries were "emerging", more than 100 others were effectively excluded from the development process. 45% of humankind lived in those poorest and most marginalized countries.  Of the remaining 55% of the global population, 20% (broadly, the middle classes of emerging countries) were progressively becoming rich consumers while 35% (workers in Northern countries) were experiencing ever-increasing social divisions.⁷

            Hence, the advantages of globalization are spread very unevenly. Some countries and regions are losing out, notably Sub-Saharan Africa where many countries are becoming more and more marginalized globally.⁸

2. PHILOSOPHICAL REACTION

2.1 The Human Dimension

            The discourse on globalization appears to be predominantly narrative. It is the kind of narration (or myth in the language of Aristotle) by which what has been heard is unquestionably accepted and passed on to others. Globalization is likewise narrated, namely heard and spoken about or read and written about without a sufficient scrutiny of its meaning and implications.

            For Aristotle, philosophy begins with the stance of reason against myth. Today, philosophy needs to challenge the mythical dimension of globalization with its critical approach to reality and to do it with some urgency. In fact, the very Greek term KRINO at the etymological origin of both "critique" and "crisis", recalls that philosophy's task is both critical and crucial.

            The critical reaction of philosophy returns the person marginalized or instrumentalized by globalization, to the centre of this phenomenon where the person should, after all, be as globalization is ultimately a human creation. Globalization is repeatedly censured for fostering an exclusive attention to the economic dimension of existence disregarding the human side of it. By returning the human being to globalization, the latter is humanized implying maximum attention to the whole person and to all persons with particular focus on human rights.⁹

            A critical scrutiny of globalization leads to the vision or the thinking that sustains it. It is only the perception of such vision or thinking that can help to suggest, if need be, an appropriate alternative for humanizing it as suggested, for instance, by the following quotation: "Such vision should spring from a conscience (the conscience of humanity) in which the prevailing propelling force should be neither money nor power, but the good of man. The inspiring idea ought to be moral and human  rather than economic or political. There is a need to refine the moral conscience of humanity."¹⁰

            Some people consider the global onslaught not a myth that can be tamed by reason but a fact that is unavoidable and irreversible. "Quit the whining! Globalization isn't a choice."¹¹ Such stand may easily lead to the belief (myth) that globalization is driven by some kind of hard determinism. Such belief in turn may persuade that the entire globe is wrapped in this determinism as globalization is global. The conclusion would then be that, as we are "globalized", we are not free. Therefore, one has no alternative but to note this relentless and elusive trend and to just let it take its course. But if philosophy can help reinstate the person at the centre of the phenomenon, any alleged determinism can be reconsidered and human freedom can be safeguarded against it.

            In the final analysis, however, the real threat to freedom within globalization is probably going to be not from determinism but rather from the manipulation by the economic and political powers like the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the World Trade Organization, in their effort to bring about a sound world economy.

2.2 The Comprehensive Dimension

            Philosophy is said to be the unification and systematization of all important knowledge within the realm of reason. It is preoccupied with the totalization of knowledge; it integrates the multiplicity of reality into a total and fundamental unity.¹² As "philosophy is concerned with everything, is a universal science",¹³ it can foster a comprehensive analysis of the multifaceted phenomenon of globalization. Such analysis will result in an equally comprehensive vision that philosophy will propose for a renewed or human globalization. Such vision will thus extend, for instance, beyond the exclusively material or spiritual or the specifically economic or political, to encompass the whole dimension of life and existence for the person and for society.

            Such comprehensiveness entails moving beyond the horizons of pure rationality to everything that constitutes the person. It also requires that philosophical considerations be not confined within pure theory. Practice is part of life and existence and philosophy is, after all, interested in all life and existence. 

            As G.F. McLean envisages, globalization points forward to a new philosophical agenda horizontally to broaden awareness to include all peoples and cultures, and vertically to deepen new metaphysical and religious dimensions of meaning and values. The philosophical challenges emerging from the widening of sensibilities to diverse cultures imply reducing the radical and exclusive focus upon reason and its abstractive power and expanding the consideration to other dimensions of human reality. The invitation is to consider not only theory, principles, pure research and abstract learning but also practice, applications, concrete and inductive considerations in order to involve and to develop the whole person and the entire reality.¹⁴

            To conclude, the stance of reason against the narration of globalization returns the person to the heart of this phenomenon giving it a human and comprehensive dimension.

3. GLOBALIZATION AND CULTURE

3.1 Cultural Encounter

            From whichever point of view globalization is looked at, a constant factor in it is that it moves across all boundaries. The boundaries being crossed are of many kinds: national, political, financial, educational, social, religious, generational and others. One of them is the cultural boundary which is usually added to the others as if it were just one of them. The proposition of this paper is that globalization is not also cultural but it is mainly so.

            "Globalization is essentially an encounter of cultures."¹⁵ Globalization becomes a problem when the crossing of the above mentioned boundaries is an intrusion trespassing on cultures rather than a friendly meeting among them. This means that the critical reaction of philosophy by which globalization is vested with human and comprehensive dimensions as described in the previous section, needs to occur within the context of culture. Culture is the meeting point of globalization and philosophy.

3.2 Inculturation

            Globalization is an encounter of cultures. The first encounter a person has with culture, the one that conditions all others, is the one sociologically described as inculturation. Inculturation is the process by which a person is introduced into the culture of birth and by which the values, norms and attitudes shared by the members of one's society are transmitted to the person.

            Inculturation coincides, in many ways, with socialization and education and like them it is divided into a first stage effected in the early years of life when the foundations of one's personality are established (primary inculturation), and a subsequent phase lasting through the rest of one's life and developing the foundation established in the early part of it (secondary inculturation). Primary inculturation is said to be substantially over by the time a person is three years old. After the age of six, a person is believed to resist anything that requires changing earlier acquisitions. Hence, primary inculturation occurs mostly at a time when one has not yet acquired the full use of one's reason and liberty. A person is introduced into culture before the person is even aware of the conditioning effects of that culture. Culture permeates the capacity to evaluate alternatives and to choose between them, thus conditioning the essence of freedom. It is at the heart of the social control to which every member of society is subjected.

            The problem arising from the unconscious acquisition of cultural bonds is said to be solved, to some extent, by education. It is believed that the education of the mind to a critical appraisal of reality rescues the person from an unconditional decency from culture. The main aim of modern education is to impart, together with the ability to accomplish certain tasks, the critical insight related to such tasks and to the context within which they are to be effected. In other words, modern education aims at providing abilities and freedom.¹⁶ The cultivation of this critical ability and, thus, of a person's freedom is the aim of philosophy too.

            This educational and philosophical exercise occurs after a person has been fundamentally inculturated. It is thus a redemptive activity rather than a creative one. It does not simply edify. It has first to modify and then to re-edify taking stock of the pre-existing situation. Primary inculturation may be amended and improved upon but it cannot be cancelled. Its infrastructure remains and it emerges, for instance, when a person encounters different cultures later in life.

3.3 Acculturation

3.3.1 Pluralism of Cultures

            The encounter with a different culture produces the phenomenon known as acculturation by which cultural elements pass over from one culture to another, giving rise to new cultural traits in the cultures that meet.

            Today acculturation has intensified as cultural pluralism is extending to every society, dispelling the colonial belief in cultural monism by which culture was considered to be fundamentally one and identified with western culture. This latter posed to be the ultimate term of reference for the rest of humanity. Such illusory expression of cultural imperialism has now lost every credibility although it may still be found lingering on under different guise, as in globalization, for instance.

            A widespread awareness has developed that single cultures exist in their specific space-time continuum according to the way various peoples react to their environment. Such awareness has induced some people to stress the autonomy of their cultures as self-sufficient units with a self-contained value system leading in some cases, to cultural isolationism and even radicalism. In some other instances, cultural pluralism has induced various degrees of relativism vis-a-vis cultures.

            Cultural autonomy and cultural relativism question the possibility of a meaningful communication among cultures. Such query implies that cultural pluralism, generally considered to have been an evolution in human sensitivity, is to be considered instead an involution. It amounts to the discovery that human beings cannot communicate among themselves and that they have no choice but to live isolated from each other. If this were to be the case, globalization would be a fallacy and the discourse on it would have to be ended here.

3.3.2 Cultural Universals and Particulars

            Cultures develop "cultural particulars" as their geographical and historical contexts elicit different responses. At the same time, cultures establish communications among themselves through their "cultural universals". Acculturation blends "cultural universals" and it respects "cultural particulars".¹⁷

            Kroeber e Kluckhohn recognize that the existence of universals after millennia of cultural history and in circumstances so diversified  suggests that such universals correspond to something remarkably profound in human nature and to a necessary condition of social life. According to the two authors, anthropological evidence testifies that the expression "a common humanity" is in no way devoid of meaning.¹⁸

            The movement of particular cultures towards their universal elements implies a movement across cultures, namely the possibility and, in fact, the need for particular cultures to meet both for what they have in common and for what each of them has as its specific element. Such meeting is part of their journey to the "universal" by discovering it in other cultures, enhanced by their very differences.

            A particular culture develops within given limits of time and space. But no single culture can fulfil the entire human potential namely no culture is perfect thus allowing the possibility of further perfection. The limits of culture caution against idealizing one's culture thus subtracting it to the constant scrutiny of critical reason.

            For philosophy, such critical analysis echoes the Socratic remark that the unexamined life is not worth living. This remark encourages once again the philosophical formation to critical evaluation vis-a-vis a passive reception of culture that would make of it an unquestioned myth. The critical evaluation of one's culture could eventually reach that fundamental and universal nucleus that could be described as metaphysical or, more pertinently here, as metacultural representing the ultimate meeting point of cultures.

3.3.3 Acculturation and Globalization

            As cultures reconcile within themselves cultural particulars and cultural universals, they can likewise manage to reconcile the local and the global. They can cultivate a global vision without loosing sight of local complexities. Global thought and local action as well as local thought and global action can be harmonized giving rise, as Chaiwat Satha Anand puts it, to  "glocalization", namely the local assimilation of global trends.¹⁹

            Hence, being an encounter of cultures, globalization ought to lead to acculturation.²⁰ This, however, does not always occur, as indicated in the case of Africa that has experienced globalization more as a cultural onslaught than as an acculturating process.

            In this connection, a diagnosis of the positive and negative aspects of globalization may be effected by referring to the movement of specific cultures towards their universal dimension. If globalization extends cultural particulars to the global level as if they were universals or if it extends one single culture to the universal level disregarding the existence of other cultures, then this would not be universalism but imperialism. If globalization is interested in single aspects like the economic, or the political, then this would exclude it from universalism. If universalism gathers all that is common in humans constituting them as such, then all of it pertains to all of them. It is a "given" which globalization has to take if it wants to be universal, as also its name suggests.

3.3.4 Social and Personal Contexts

            The acculturation exercise is not occurring in an ideal or abstract situation. It is socially contextualized implying that the specific condition of a society is made to bear on its culture and on its meeting with other cultures. Encounters between societies and their cultures may be balanced, generating a smooth acculturating process. But there may be cases when such encounters are lopsided such that the cultural elements of one society do not blend with, but rather overpower those of another society. Such unbalanced social and cultural relations are usually due to the power of a society, not of a culture, over another derived from its territorial and demographic size, its economic and organizational assets, and similar social aspects.²¹ This unbalanced relation provokes quite often cultural imperialism, by which stronger societies impose or try to impose their culture on weaker ones.

            Another challenge to a proper acculturating process derives from the fact that acculturation occurs among persons already inculturated in their respective culture. This implies the possibility that the acculturation process may pose a threat to one's culture prompting the insurgence of defense mechanisms and the entrenchment in one's own culture. In some of these cases, considerations about the richness of acculturation and the sterility of cultural radicalism appear to make little way into the fear of loosing the foundations of one's identity. And yet, there seems to be no alternative in cultural growth than to practice dialogue and to respect freedom.

4. CONFRONTATION

4.1. Conflict

            Globalization creates a conflicting situation particularly in Africa. It trespasses on cultures undermining acculturation and human relations. According to S. Huntington, the most significant distinctions between peoples are no longer ideological, political or economic, but cultural. Future conflicts will see civilizations in opposition to one another over this.²²

            Conflicts become cultural when the encounter of cultures is discordant, namely when there is dissonance in acculturation. Such disharmony derives from a disregard for the universalizing dynamism in acculturation and the consequent prevalence of particular interests over universal values.

            At the same time, the possibility of cultural conflict is at the door of everyone as cultural pluralism is pervading all societies and cultural encounters are affecting everybody. All this is further stimulated by the very phenomenon of globalization.

            The solutions of cultural conflicts need to refer to their causes which may be political, economical, historical, psychological, demographic or otherwise.²³ Both the causes and the solutions of conflicts need to blend into an overall vision and strategy which can only be effected, as indicated, within a cultural context. Having argued that in dealing with conflicting situations it is necessary to have the contribution from various experts in disciplines like sociology, diplomacy, administration and particularly politics, M. Rocard concludes that "democracy, sound leadership and peace are products of a culture which can only yield returns in the long term". Thus the multifaceted approach in dealing with situations of conflict is ultimately to be referred to culture.²⁴

            In line with this, all skill and talents deployed in the management of conflict have to converge into one's own culture and extend to other cultures as well. All steps from the inception of the analysis of a conflicting situation to its final solution need to be culturally contextualized for them to be feasible.

            Such contextualization implies, among the rest, that in the case of Africa, for instance, African themselves provide the definitions of the criteria necessary to deal with conflict, together with the supporting structures needed to prevent, manage and resolve conflicts in Africa.²⁵ Foreign actors in Africa may fail to address "the local capacity for peace", neglecting the realities on which past peace rested and future peace can be built. The local capacity for peace must be empowered.²⁶ At the same time, Africa needs to consider the wider context of the world community and foreign actors could help such journey to “otherness” in culture.

            The redress of conflictual situations caused by globalization cannot be reconciled by the simple awareness and due recognition of an injustice trusting that some "natural", "necessary" or "invisible"  solution may occur. Any lopsided relation among cultures needs to be addressed first. If, for instance, globalization continues to be perceived as an onslaught or aggression, defense mechanisms will be devised and the danger of open conflict will increase. A simple call for collaboration between sides that have had tense and sour relations for centuries is idealistic, if not paradoxical.

4.2. Reconciliation

4.2.1 Desire and Possibility

            The solution of conflicting situations aims at establishing a condition of harmony where differences are set aside, interests are balanced and a stable peace is created once for all. The  Christian ethos moves beyond this, aiming at reconciliation by which differences are realistically evaluated in their dynamic and enduring potential and the elements of tension are allowed to unfold their mutual fruitfulness.²⁷ Reconciliation implies having a realistic grasp of the conflicting situation including the possibility that reconciliation may be resisted and conflict may be continued. An unlimited desire for reconciliation must be increasingly brought to coincide with the limits of human possibility, gradually reducing the distance and the tension between desire and possibility for reconciliation.²⁸

            Such realism implies being clear about the ideas and the facts involved in the reconciliatory act involved. In this connection, W.K. Frankena remarks that what one needs in such perplexing situations is, quite often, not a particular ethical instruction but simply more factual knowledge and greater conceptual clarity. "The two besetting sins in our prevailing habits of ethical thinking are our ready acquiescence in unclarity and our complacence in ignorance - the very sins that Socrates died combating over two thousand years ago." The disposition to find out and respect the relevant facts and to think clearly is not limited to the moral life but it is nevertheless morally desirable and even rather imperative.²⁹

            Concerning the clarity of ideas, the logical suggestion of this paper is that they be those bearing on the cultural dynamism unfolding in cultural encounters. But as the conflicting situations considered here are those deriving from globalization and as globalization pivots practically on the economy, a specific set of ideas that needs realistically to be clarified is the one bearing on economics. One may not agree with the overwhelming role plaid by the economy in globalization, but one has nevertheless to admit it and deal with it accordingly and realistically.³⁰ One needs therefore to be clear about the language, the laws, the formulas and other paradigms used in economics and carried over into globalization. As these ideas are clarified, their practical application has to be considered too, since there is a need for a stronger and better organized network between theory and praxis.³¹

            With regard to the factual knowledge related to globalization, one should be clear about the actual facts related both to the positive and to the negative aspects of globalization. The facts related to globalization are particularly and crucially needed because of the very elusiveness of globalization.

4.2.2 Values

            S. Huntington remarks that conflicts among cultures will be over their values being viewed as antagonistic. Values, more than interests, will be the reason for violence. As value systems crumble, introversion will increase resulting from a world without frontiers (globalization) and from a world without references (values).³²

            History indicates that a rapid and impelling movement across cultural boundaries provokes introversion of values, particularly of those bearing on behaviour and morality. A meaningful example of this in the history of philosophy is found in the post Aristotelian period when Greek political and social life was shattered by the Macedonian and the Roman conquests that widened the areas of political and social interests beyond traditional boundaries. But the reaction of many people to that outward movement took the opposite direction of introversion. People moved from being organic members of their society to becoming individual persons within their world. Philosophy turned to individual ethics and the main schools of thought converged on epicureanism, stoicism, hedonism, scepticism and eclecticism that centered on the individual.

            Today as globalization widens the social and political horizon across all boundaries, people could react by withdrawing into narrower confines where values cannot be shared. With no common terms of reference for mutual communications and understanding, the very solution of conflicts becomes problematic. In fact, the prevention and the solution of conflicts is dependent on the value assumptions of the people involved.

            For instance, as D. Mieth points out, it is very important to know whether the value determining the prevention or the solution of a conflict is social integration or social innovation. Social integration is suggested by the idea that society is fundamentally a properly structured whole into which the parts, including its members, need to integrate to preserve society. In this case, conflicts are mishaps of the system, negative events to be prevented or eliminated. If instead society is considered to be a system in constant need of reform, conflicts are part of the system and they become instrumental to social innovation. Hence, depending on the value assumptions, conflicts endanger the system and the conflicting parts must be integrated into it, or conflicts develop the system and produce innovation.³³

            The journey from conflict to reconciliation and then to cooperation is the one from individual interests to shared values. These values, as related to the issue of globalization, are those bearing on human relations and behaviour, on freedom and reconciliation, on “otherness” and respect, and on similar ones that can be generally described as moral. Hence, the movement from cultural particulars to cultural universals prompted by acculturation  is, in many ways, an outward journey from individual to social ethics, the latter  tallying with "cultural" ethics, namely with ethics encompassing both the particular and the universal, the local and the global. As attention to ethics means attention to the person, the presence of ethics in globalization entails the presence of the person in it. The contribution of philosophy to the human dimension of globalization is thus effected specifically through ethics.

            Ethics (social and "cultural") postulates solidarity as also globalization does, or should do, by its very name and meaning. In fact, the challenge of globalization can only be met on the common ground of solidarity which, in a pluralistic society, can only be around reason, advocated by philosophy as the only common denominator of humanity.

5. PHILOSOPHY AND CULTURE

5.1 Meaning of Culture

            A clarification is added here concerning the meaning of culture and its relation to philosophy. In Western tradition, culture referred initially to the improvement and refinement of the person. In recent times, a new understanding of culture developed the social dimension of it.³⁴ Both meanings meet in the  perception of culture that refers to the characteristic manner in which humans relate to their environment. They consider and interpret it, developing explanations and elaborating values that reorganize and, to some extent, re-create their environment. Human beings relate with it through the set of elements that they have placed between it and themselves, elements that constitute the new universe in which they live. This universe moulded with language, art, religion, behaviour, ideas, values and other elements is the universe of culture. Culture is the network of human behaviour, thought and relations created in accordance with the human interpretation of the reality surrounding human beings as the objective "other".³⁵

            The person is within culture and it is, in a way, part of it. At the same time, the person can ponder on culture. Hence, philosophy operates within culture but also upon culture.³⁶ 

5.2 First and Second Order Philosophy

            Contextualizing philosophy within culture facilitates an understand of it as a dynamic relationship between first and second order philosophy and thus having a more comprehensive view of philosophy.

            First order philosophy starts when people seek motivations to nourish their identity, to justify their behaviour, to preserve their coherence and, generally, to fulfill their existential ends. Such motivations have to be supported by reasons that develop into a discourse with arguments for and against one's stand or statement.³⁷

            Second order philosophy ponders on first order philosophy, questioning  its answers and systematizing its thinking into a structured whole. Second order philosophy goes on to organize its own experience and it becomes a discipline in which people are trained to the task of a rational, critical and systematic approach in philosophy.

            Second order philosophy meets with culture and such analysis of culture leads ultimately to the person who constitutes the core of culture and in whom cultures find their unity in and among themselves.³⁸ If the person is the core of culture, then one would seem justified to conclude that the critical study of culture tallies with the critical study of the person and thus the philosophy of culture is the philosophy of the person or philosophical anthropology. In this latter case, one would feel justified to conclude that philosophical anthropology could cater for a philosophical study of culture.

5.3 Philosophy of Culture

            But the contention here is that such conclusion is not justified in the sense that philosophical anthropology does not sufficiently cater for an appropriate study of culture. In fact, philosophical anthropology is motivated, to a great extent, by the need to study the person in his/her entirety. The study of the person by other disciplines has been generally partial or fragmented resulting in a scattered knowledge by which aspects of the person have sometimes been exchanged for the whole of it. Hence, philosophical anthropology goes beyond the particulars of life and culture, considering the relationship of the person with nature, its metaphysical, physical, psychic and spiritual origin, the forces controlling and being controlled by the person, the fundamental laws of the person's biological, psychic, spiritual and social development.³⁹

            As philosophical anthropology moves beyond the particularity of culture to focus on the generality of the person, the person could be severed from the cultural context within which he/she is understood. A universal consideration of the person detached from his/her specific context could lead to a totalitarian objectivity and to a disregard for what is different. The consideration of the universal has to remain constantly linked to the particular and vice versa, as encouraged for instance by the constant relationship between first and second order philosophy.

            Such contextual concern provides one with the reasons why contemporary studies of the person turn to culture rather than to nature. Human beings are not considered to be prefabricated by nature, so to speak, but to be they themselves inventing and accomplishing their own existence, facilitated by the anthropogenic dimension of culture. Several projects have emerged to help in this, like fenomenology, existentialism, structuralism and neopositivism.⁴⁰ But here too, their limitation seems to have been in having focussed on the person without an equally adequate attention to the cultures within which persons exist.

            Cultural studies and pluralism increasingly reveal that cultural traits have a determining influence on the metaphysical, epistemological, ethical, aesthetical and other philosophical views in peoples' minds and lives. Hence, perception and meaning, principles and behaviour, values and judgement have to be culturally contextualized. Cultural diversity recognizes that a people's culture is the matrix of their identity, a matrix constituted by the "webs of significance" spun by them to construct their life. To understand a person and a people it is necessary to grasp such configuration of meaning and life that constitutes their vital context, which is what the philosophy of culture tries to accomplish.⁴¹

                                                               NOTES

            1. Conference on Globalization, the perceptions, experiences, and responses of the religious traditions and cultural communities in the Asia Pacific region, Radisson, Shah Alam, 4-6 July 1997 (Organizers: JUST Malaysia with Pax Christi Australia).

            2. D. David, "The Development Perspective", in The Courier, No. 164, July-August 1997, p. 63.

            3. P. Martin, in D. David, "Alternatives or Criticisms", in The Courier, No. 164, July-August 1997, p. 65.

            4. We are moving towards the "20:80 Society" in which 20% of the population will steer the remaining 80% that will be practically marginalized. H.-P. Martin and H. Schumann, La trappola della globalizzazione, Bolzano, Edition Raetia, 1997, pp. 9-12.

            5. P. Henriot, "Globalization and Africa", New People, March 1998, p. 15.

            6. W. Sachs, "One World", in W. Sachs, The Development Dictionary, Johannesburg, Witwatersrand University Press, 1993, pp. 102-115. What is universalism for the West is imperialism for the rest, Samuel Huntington comments (B. Ryan "Spiritualities", in The Courier, No. 164, July-August 1997, p. 82).

            7. D. David, "Alternatives or Criticisms", op. cit., p. 65.

            8. Africa's share of overall capital flows to developing countries fell from 33% in the 1970s to only 6% in the period 1985-95. The same trend can be observed in foreign investments and trade, as shown in the following table.

                                                                                    1980                 1993

            Exports                                                 0.7 %               0.4 %

            Imports                                                 1.1 %               0.7 %

            Direct foreign investments                                 0.9 %               0.4 %

            GNP                                                                 0.6 %               0.4 %

            E.N. Mbekou and G. Nziki, "The Challenges Facing Sub-Saharan Africa", in The Courier, No. 164, July-August 1997, pp. 80-81.

            9. Transnational corporations "ignore, if not destroy, local cultural and spiritual values with impunity. ... Africans see themselves valued, not for who they are as humans, but as what they have to become to fit into the plans and expectations of donor countries and UN agencies." (B. Ryan "Spiritualities", op. cit., pp. 82-83).

            10. Paul VI, Allocuzione alla Conferenza Internazionale del Lavoro, 10.6.1969.

            11. T.L. Friedman, Herald Tribune, 30.09.97.

            12. N.A. Horvath, Essentials to Philosophy, Woodbury, N.Y., Barron's Educational Series, 1974, pp. 4-5.

            13. J. Maritain, An Introduction to Philosophy, New York, Sheed and Ward, 1930, p. 103.

            14. G.F. McLean, Presentation of the Theme of the Conference on Philosophical Challenges and Opportunities of Globalization, Leaflet of the Council for Research in Values and Philosophy, Washington, January 1998, pp. 5-6.

            15. YAB Dato' Seri Anwar Ibrahim, Speech at the Conference on Globalization, the perceptions, experiences, and responses of the religious traditions and cultural communities ... , op. cit.

            16. Education should aim at an "integral formation by means of a systematic and critical assimilation of culture. . . It must develop persons who are responsible and inner-directed, capable of choosing freely in conformity with their conscience." The Catholic School, Rome, The Sacred Congregation for Catholic Education, 1977, No. 26, 31.

            17. Kwasi Wiredu has developed an interesting analysis on the existence of cultural universals and particulars within an African context in his Cultural Universals and Particulars, An African Perspective, Boomington and Indianapolis, Indiana University Press, 1996.

            18. A.L. Kroeber e C. Kluckhohn, Culture, A Critical Review of Concepts and Definitions, New York, Vintage Books, 1963, pp. 351, 353.

            19. Conference on Globalization, the perceptions, experiences, and responses of the religious traditions and cultural communities ..., op. cit.

            20. Globalization is said to bring about cultural integration and cultural osmosis across the world. Integration describes the joining of different parts to form a whole in which the parts may retain their original nature changing only their mutual relation. Osmosis refers to the passage of a liquid from one side of a surface to another without alteration in the liquid. In acculturation, there is neither integration nor osmosis (according to the above meanings) in the sense that cultural elements do not simply pass from one culture to the other (osmosis) nor are such elements combining to form a simple aggregate of new relations (integration). In acculturation, cultural elements meet and generate new elements in both cultures.

            21. To say that a culture is superior or stronger than others prompts the question as to the paradigms used to assess such superiority or strength. The often quoted case of the Romans being overcome by the culture of the Greeks whom they had overcome politically needs to be assessed within the wider context of Hellenic culture, at the same time bearing in mind that Roman "openness" to the culture of the peoples they conquered was meant to be a better way of dominating them.

            22. D. David, "Globalization: Some Key Questions", op. cit., p. 54.

            23. K. Karl, "Conflict Prevention", M. Rocard, "Towards Better Prevention", in The Courier, No. 168, March-April 1998, pp. 65, 68-69.

            24. M. Rocard, op. cit., p. 69.

            25. J.d.D. Pinheiro, "Europe's Response to Conflicts in Africa", in The Courier, No. 168, p. 66; M. Rocard, op.cit. p. 69; W. Ossay Leba, "Conflict Management in Africa", op.cit. pp. 76-78. Conflict prevention and settlement in Africa has its highest institutional means in the OAU. In June 1993, the 29th Conference of Heads of State and Government meeting in Cairo set up a "Mechanism for the prevention, management and settlement of conflicts" within the OAU.

            26. Conflict today has been, so to speak, "democratized" and there are several actors who have a role to play in preventing or solving conflicts. John McDonald distinguishes nine categories  of actors in what he calls Multi-Track Diplomacy, namely governments, professional organizations, the business community, Churches, the media, private citizens, training and educational institutes, activists, funding organizations. To these, Kumar Rupesinghe adds United Nations ('Second-Track Diplomacy'), eminent persons, women's movements, youth groups, artists. Some analysts stress the contribution of NGOs and religious organizations due to their familiarity with the local situation. P. van Tongeren, "Exploring the Local Capacity for Peace", in The Courier, 168, March-April 1998, p. 70.

            27. For instance, Mt. 10.34; 11.12; Lk. 13.22; 1 Cor 9.24 ff. D. Mieth, "Conflict", in B. Stoeckle (ed.), Concise Dictionary of Christian Ethics, London, Burns & Oates, 1979, p. 51.

            28. K. Demmer, "Forgiveness", in B. Stoeckle (ed.), op. cit., p. 106.

            29. W.K. Frankena, Ethics, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice-Hall Inc., 1963, pp. 11-12, 51.

            30. According to J. Joblin, an original feature in the social teaching of John Paul II is in his demand that people confront the economic system in which they live in order to understand its mechanisms and the philosophy that inspires it and thus acquire the expertise to deal with it competently. J. Joblin, "Chiesa e Mondializzazione", in La Civiltà Cattolica, 17 Jan 1998, Year 149, N. 1/3542, pp. 129-141.

            31. "Reflection without action is verbalism and action without reflection is activism." Paulo Freire in "Globalization: economy challenges the gospel", in New People, March 1998, p. 1.

            32. D. David, "Globalization: Some Key Questions", op. cit., p. 54.

            33. D. Mieth, op. cit., p. 50.

            34. A.T. Dalfovo, "Culture: Meaning and Relation to Philosophy", in J.M. Nyasani (ed.), Philosophical Focus on Culture and Traditional Thought Systems in Development, Nairobi, Konrad Adenauer Foundation, 1994, pp. 66-75. C. Kluckhohn and A.L. Kroeber, op. cit.

            35. E. Cassirer, An Essay on Man, New Haven and London, Yale University Press, 1944. D.A. Masolo, "Philosophy and Culture: A Critique", in H. Odera Oruka & D.A. Masolo (eds.), Philosophy and Culture, Nairobi, Bookwise Limited, 1983, p. 48.

            36. "Philosophy is crucially, even fundamentally a cultural phenomenon and any attempt to view it abstractly independently of its cultural environment is bound to be an unrewarding, futile exercise -- a poor, speculative product." J. Olu Sodipo, "Philosophy in pre-colonial Africa", in Teaching and Research in Philosophy: Africa, Paris, UNESCO, 1986, p. 74.

            37. K. Wiredu, "Philosophy in Africa Today", March 1981 (mimeo), in H.O. Oruka and D.A. Masolo (eds.), op. cit., p. 23.

            38. According to J. Olu Sodipo, first order philosophy is "the general intellectual temper of a culture, its characteristic mode of thought, its pervasive world outlook", while second order philosophy is moulded by "some members of that culture (who) attempt to give a systematic expression to its world view or to analyze and modify some of its aspects." (Op. cit., p. 75).

            39. B. Mondin, Dizionario Enciclopedico di Filosopfia Teologia e Morale, Milano, Massimo, 1989, pp. 40, 41, quoting A. Heschel and M. Scheler.

            40. Ibid.

            41. L. Outlaw, "Philosophy and Culture: Critical Hermeneutics and Social Transformation", in H. Odera Oruka & D.A. Masolo (eds.), op. cit., p. 25. "Believing.. that man is an animal suspended in webs of significance he himself has spun, I take culture to be those webs, and the analysis of it to be therefore not an experimental science in search of law but an interpretive one in search of meaning". C. Geertz, "Think Description: Toward an Interpretive Theory of Culture," The Interpretation of Cultures, New York, Basic Books, York, 1973, p. 5.