En
Register Log in
  1. Main
  2. Monograph
  3. Pedagogy and Psychology as Sciences for the Format...
  4. The Boundaries of Culture and Multiculturalism fro...

The Boundaries of Culture and Multiculturalism from the Perspective of an Anthropological Ontological Turn In Sociology

Book Chapter
DOI: 10.31483/r-102070
Open Access
Monograph «Pedagogy and Psychology as Sciences for the Formation of the Potential of Modern Society»
Creative commons logo
Published in:
Monograph «Pedagogy and Psychology as Sciences for the Formation of the Potential of Modern Society»
Author:
Aleksandr I. Kugai 1
Work direction:
Глава 14
Pages:
143-151
Received: 18 April 2022

Rating:
Article accesses:
1828
Published in:
РИНЦ
1 Severo-Zapadnyi institut upravleniia FGBOU VO "Rossiiskaia akademiia narodnogo khoziaistva i gosudarstvennoi sluzhby pri Prezidente RF"
For citation:
Kirillova T. K., Burtseva E. V., Rak I. P., Karelin V. M., Ryspaeva C. K., Akhunzhanova M. K., Chukhrov A. S., Kruglova M. S., Sudakov O. V., Sudakov D. V., Sagitova V. R., Savina M. I., Smirnova O. G., Shutova N. V., Shutkina Z. A., Barsukov A. V., Polynskaya I. N., Potolokova M. O., Suvorova E. V., Kugai A. I., Petrova L. G., Shevchenko N. N., Elfimova A. V., Maslennikova S. F., Mezenina O. B., & Medvedeva A. A. (2022). Pedagogy and Psychology as Sciences for the Formation of the Potential of Modern Society, 172. Чебоксары: PH "Sreda". https://doi.org/10.31483/a-10391

Abstract

The chapter addresses to the theoretical foundations of multiculturalism as a potential for the development of a modern multi-ethnic and multi-confessional society from the position of an ontological turn in sociology, in which culture as a universal method of understanding human diversity is placed in a pluralistic approach to ontology, involving a variety of ontological schemes that form various social systems, each of which has its own understanding human differences. Sociality is not so much a condition of human existence as an attribute that is distributed among entities according to certain ontological classifications. Also, culture cannot exhaustively explain the sources of differences between human groups, since it is the product of one of these ontological schemes. The challenge that sociological theory must accept in such a way that the ontological turn in anthropology is not to circumvent and eliminate the differences between ontological perspectives, but to constantly change its conceptual obligations within the framework of a comparative approach to ontology, which eliminates any neutral point of view.

References

  1. 1. Кугай А.И. Неоэссенциализм как учение о паттернах человеческой жизни в теории мультикультурализма / А.И. Кугай //Культурология, искусствоведение и филология: актуальные вопросы: материалы Всероссийской научно-практической конференции с международным участием / под редакцией Э.В. Фомина. – Чебоксары: Среда, 2021. – С. 20–24.
  2. 2. Кугай А.И. Терпимость и инакомыслие в политическом процессе / А.И. Кугай // Педагогика, психология, общество: актуальные исследования: сборник материалов Всероссийской научно-практической конференции. – Чебоксары: Среда, 2021. – С. 50–53.
  3. 3. Кугай А.И. Права человека: от теории – к политике / А.И. Кугай // Управленческое консультирование. – 2021. – (5). – С. 32–44.
  4. 4. Benhabib S (2002) The Claims of Culture: Equality and Diversity in the Global Era. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  5. 5. Boas F., 'The Aims of Anthropological Research', Science. New Series,1932, vol. 76.P. 905–613.
  6. 6. Descola P. The Ecology of Others: Anthropology and the Question of Nature. Translated by G Godbout and BP Luley. Chicago, IL: Prickly Paradigm Press. 2012.
  7. 7. Evans-Pritchard EE/ Witchcraft, Oracles, and Magic Among the Azande. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1976.
  8. 8. Clifford J and Marcus GE (eds). Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1986.
  9. 9. Charbonnier P, Salmon G and Skafish P (eds). Comparative Metaphysics: Ontology After Anthropology. London: Rowman and Littlefield International. 2017.
  10. 10. Kompridis N (Normativizing hybridity/neutralizing culture. Political Theory 33. 2005.: 318–343.
  11. 11. Kukathas C. The Liberal Archipelago: A Theory of Diversity and Freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2003.
  12. 12. Laegaard S (Multiculturalism and contextualism: How is context relevant for political theory? European Journal of Political Theory, 2015.14(3): 259–276.
  13. 13. Modood T Multiculturalism. Cambridge: Polity, 2013
  14. 14. Parekh B) Rethinking Multiculturalism: Cultural Diversity and Political Theory. London: Macmillan. 2006.
  15. 15. Strathern M.T he Gender of the Gift: Problems with Women and Problems with Society in Melanesia. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 1988.
  16. 16. Skafish P. The Descola variations: The ontological geography of beyond nature and culture. Qui Parle: Critical Humanities & Social Sciences. 2016. 25 (1–2): 65–93.
  17. 17. Shachar A. Multicultural Jurisdictions: Cultural Differences and Women’s Rights. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2001.
  18. 18. Taylor C. Multiculturalism: Examining the Politics of Recognition. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. 1994.
  19. 19. Wagner R. The Invention of Culture. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. 1981.

Comments(0)

When adding a comment stipulate:
  • the relevance of the published material;
  • general estimation (originality and relevance of the topic, completeness, depth, comprehensiveness of topic disclosure, consistency, coherence, evidence, structural ordering, nature and the accuracy of the examples, illustrative material, the credibility of the conclusions;
  • disadvantages, shortcomings;
  • questions and wishes to author.