Finding Orientation - Orienting transdiciplinary research through cultural differences
1
Key elements for generating culturally robust knowledge in transdisciplinary research: LOST TO THE ANTHROPOCENE? SEEKING ORIENTATION… ORIENTING TRANSDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH THROUGH CULTURAL DIFFERENCES Literature Bhabha, H. K. (1994): The location of culture. Routledge, London, New York Crutzen, P. J. (2002): Geology of mankind. Nature, Vol. 415 (3): 23 Geertz, C. (1983): The way we think now: Toward an ethnography of modern thought. In: Geertz, C. (Ed.): Local knowledge: Further essays in interpretive anthropology. Basic Books, New York: 147-163 Wimmer, F. M. (1996): Is intercultural philosophy a new branch or a new orientation in philosophy? URL: http://homepage.univie.ac.at/franz.martin.wimmer/intpheng95.html (last access: 12.11.14) How can transdisciplinary research contribute to culturally robust knowledge within or beyond the concept of the Anthropocene? action reflection dialogue/ polylogue (own graphic based on Freire 2000, Wimmer 1996) Contact Leuphana University of Luneburg Center for Methods Moritz Engbers ([email protected]) Vera Brandner ([email protected]) Reflecting about positionings, differentiation processes, othering and hybridity – part of every research process – can make research topographies visible. Thus, previously neglected ways of sense-making, world-views, working styles, practices and power relations can become integral parts of transdisciplinary research processes. ‘Culturally robust knowledge’ takes into account ambiguity, complexity and contradictions as fundamental features of knowledge. Therefore, it is sensitive to cultural differences and power relations and serves societal and cultural transformation. Culturally robust knowledge is constantly challenged. “Through the concept of cultural difference I want to draw attention to the common ground and lost territory of contemporary critical debates. For they all recognize that the problem of the cultural emerges only at the significatory boundaries of cultures, where meanings and values are (mis)read or signs are misappropriated.” - Bhabha (1994: 50) “From dia-logues (intending mutual understanding) poly-logues need to be developed, intending mutual convincing on a basis of commonly agreeable ideas. We can expect that ideas expressed in such sorts of polylogues will be linguistically and culturally mixed” - Wimmer (1996: 14) “The problem of integration of cultural life becomes one of making it possible for people inhabiting different worlds to have a genuine, and reciprocal, impact upon one another [,…] the first step is surely to accept the depth of the differences; the second to understand what these differences are; and the third to construct some sort of vocabulary in which they can be publicly formulated” - Geertz (1983: 161) The Anthropocene as a “human-dominated, geological epoch” (Crutzen 2002) is a cultural product itself. It refers to an idea of humankind that can create an illusion of complete knowledge or optimal regulation. We argue that a constant process of searching and orienting is a precondition for sustainable development and we ask the question, what role and agency have humans in the current era. Sustainability researchers are confronted with highly complex topics, such as global systems, climate change or processes of globalization. To approach these issues increasingly requires communication and collaboration on an intercultural level. We understand culture in a broad sense as dynamic and characterized by meanings, symbols, values, knowledge, action and materiality. Thus, scientific disciplines, knowledge fields or societal domains can all be understood as “cultural”. We look on transdisciplinary research as settings of cultural difference. This broadens the perspective on the actors, knowledges and practices involved.
-
Upload
isoe-institute-for-social-ecological-research -
Category
Documents
-
view
13 -
download
2
description
Engbers, Moritz/Vera Brandner (2014): Finding Orientation - Orienting transdiciplinary research through cultural differences. Posterpräsentation, Tagung „Lost in the Anthropocene? – Nachhaltige Wissenschaft in der Epoche der Menschheit“ am 21. November 2014 in Frankfurt am Main
Transcript of Finding Orientation - Orienting transdiciplinary research through cultural differences
Key elements for generating culturally robust knowledge in transdisciplinary research:
LOST TO THE ANTHROPOCENE? SEEKING ORIENTATION… ORIENTING TRANSDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH THROUGH CULTURAL DIFFERENCES
Literature Bhabha, H. K. (1994): The location of culture. Routledge, London, New York Crutzen, P. J. (2002): Geology of mankind. Nature, Vol. 415 (3): 23 Geertz, C. (1983): The way we think now: Toward an ethnography of modern thought. In: Geertz, C. (Ed.): Local knowledge: Further essays in interpretive anthropology. Basic Books, New York: 147-163 Wimmer, F. M. (1996): Is intercultural philosophy a new branch or a new orientation in philosophy? URL: http://homepage.univie.ac.at/franz.martin.wimmer/intpheng95.html (last access: 12.11.14)
How can transdisciplinary research contribute to culturally robust knowledge within or beyond the concept of the Anthropocene?
action
reflection dialogue/ polylogue
(own graphic based on Freire 2000, Wimmer 1996)
Contact Leuphana University of Luneburg Center for Methods Moritz Engbers ([email protected]) Vera Brandner ([email protected])
Reflecting about positionings, differentiation processes, othering and hybridity – part of every research process – can make research topographies visible. Thus, previously neglected ways of sense-making, world-views, working styles, practices and power relations can become integral parts of transdisciplinary research processes.
‘Culturally robust knowledge’ takes into account ambiguity, complexity and contradictions as fundamental features of knowledge. Therefore, it is sensitive to cultural differences and power relations and serves societal and cultural transformation. Culturally robust knowledge is constantly challenged.
“Through the concept of cultural difference I want to draw attention to the common ground and lost territory of contemporary critical debates. For they all recognize that the problem of the cultural emerges only at the significatory boundaries of cultures, where meanings and values are (mis)read or signs are misappropriated.” - Bhabha (1994: 50)
“From dia-logues (intending mutual understanding) poly-logues need to be developed, intending mutual convincing on a basis of commonly agreeable ideas. We can expect that ideas expressed in such sorts of polylogues will be linguistically and culturally mixed” - Wimmer (1996: 14)
“The problem of integration of cultural life becomes one of making it possible for people inhabiting different worlds to have a genuine, and reciprocal, impact upon one another [,…] the first step is surely to accept the depth of the differences; the second to understand what these differences are; and the third to construct some sort of vocabulary in which they can be publicly formulated” - Geertz (1983: 161)
The Anthropocene as a “human-dominated, geological epoch” (Crutzen 2002) is a cultural product itself. It refers to an idea of humankind that can create an illusion of complete knowledge or optimal regulation. We argue that a constant process of searching and orienting is a precondition for sustainable development and we ask the question, what role and agency have humans in the current era.
Sustainability researchers are confronted with highly complex topics, such as global systems, climate change or processes of globalization. To approach these issues increasingly requires communication and collaboration on an intercultural level. We understand culture in a broad sense as dynamic and characterized by meanings, symbols, values, knowledge, action and materiality. Thus, scientific disciplines, knowledge fields or societal domains can all be understood as “cultural”. We look on transdisciplinary research as settings of cultural difference. This broadens the perspective on the actors, knowledges and practices involved.
