Root at 15:59, 2 September 2013

2013-09-02T15:59:59Z

Root: /* Comparing cultures on the foundation of the concept “Lebenswelt” */

2013-09-02T15:58:26Z

Comparing cultures on the foundation of the concept “Lebenswelt”

Root at 15:58, 2 September 2013

2013-09-02T15:58:07Z

Root: Created page with "=pdf document= Media:Juliane_S_Srubarnotes.pdf"

2013-09-01T16:20:37Z

Created page with "=pdf document= Media:Juliane_S_Srubarnotes.pdf"

New page

=pdf document=
[[Media:Juliane_S_Srubarnotes.pdf]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:59, 2 September 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:
		+	This page contains student contributions of the course [[Comparing Cultures]].
		+
	=Comparing cultures on the foundation of the concept “Lebenswelt”=		=Comparing cultures on the foundation of the concept “Lebenswelt”=

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 =Comparing cultures on the foundation of the concept “Lebenswelt”=
-Notes to the presentation on the 17th of July 2013 by Laura Bickel and Juliane Schell
+Notes to the presentation on the 17th of July 2013 by Laura B and Juliane S
 Srubar, Ilja (2005): “Die pragmatische Lebenswelttheorie als Grundlage interkulturellen Vergleichs”, in:

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:58, 2 September 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	=~~pdf document~~=	+	=Comparing cultures on the foundation of the concept “Lebenswelt”=
−	~~[[Media~~:~~Juliane_S_Srubarnotes~~.~~pdf]]~~	+
		+	Notes to the presentation on the 17th of July 2013 by Laura Bickel and Juliane Schell
		+
		+	Srubar, Ilja (2005): “Die pragmatische Lebenswelttheorie als Grundlage interkulturellen Vergleichs”, in:
		+	Srubar, I./Renn,J./Wenzel U. (Hrsg.): Kulturen vergleichen Sozial und kulturwissenschaftliche Grundlagen und Kontroversen, Wiesbaden, 151171.
		+
		+	1. Contra Matthes (151157)
		+
		+	Srubar is arguing against Matthes (1992) radical relativism which is based on the idea that by comparing
		+	cultures something unfamiliar of another culture is always turned into something familiar of the own
		+	culture. This process is called Nostrification. From this perspective it is not possible to compare cultures
		+	because the person who tries to compare will always see the other culture from his specific perspective.
		+	From Srubar’s point of view it is possible to compare cultures on the foundation of the concept
		+	Lebenswelt. All cultures have a common, circular logic: they produce and reproduce in the medium
		+	“sense” and it is possible to observe cultures in this process. Srubar’s thoughts are grounded on the one
		+	hand on the sociological systemtheory
		+	of Niklas Luhmann and on the other and on the
		+	phenomenological tradition of Husserl. Srubar aims to research about the constitutive processes of
		+	cultures: how do cultures become and how do they remain?
		+
		+	2. Concept “Lebenswelt” and definition of culture (157166)
		+
		+	Every culture is able to be reduced on the formal structure of “Lebenswelt”. So this concept is a
		+	universal basic for every culture. The concept of “Lebenswelt” is structured in four mechanisms and
		+	each mechanism includes a specific space of knowledge: There are the mechanisms of selfawareness
		+	and body, of action and interaction/ communication and the mechanism of signs and semantics.
		+	Let’s have a look: What does Srubar means with the space of selfawareness
		+	and constitution of the own body? Well, this mechanism describes the way every individual thinks , behaves and feels in the
		+	world. It is a very subjective space of knowledge depending on one’s own social surrounding and
		+	constitution of one’s character and body.
		+
		+	The mechanism of action means the way somebody acts in his/her surrounding: The way a human being
		+	influences and works in the world.
		+
		+	Well, at the moment a human being acts in the world, he/she gets into contact with other subjectives or
		+	objectives: This is the space of interaction and communication. As you can see there is a mindful
		+	connection between the single mechanisms and the spaces of knowledge are generative. Because
		+	knowledge is in movement, grows and degenerates in communication and action you cannot fix the
		+	single spaces: They depend on each other and influence the other mechanisms.
		+	However, the space of signs fixes the subjective knowledge on an objective level of semantics and
		+	semiotics. That is necessary for communication and interaction, but of course this mechanism of signs is
		+	in movement, too. The language of the 21th century is not the same as the common signs of the 16th
		+	century.
		+
		+	In summary, cultures integrate these four spaces of knowledge. And cultures are constituted by these
		+	mechanisms. Therefore all cultures share the same identity but in reality they are different. There is a
		+	cultural variety as the knowledge constituted by the single spaces is generative and individual. Every
		+	culture has its individual way of realizing the basic concept of “Lebenswelt”.
		+
		+	3. Comparing cultures based on this theory (166170)
		+
		+	What does the concept of Lebenswelt imply for the comparison of cultures? Every human being has an
		+	individual Lebenswelt, also people coming from the same cultural background. There are different
		+	degrees of shared Lebenswelt. Some people share more aspects of Lebenswelt than others e.g. two
		+	people studying at the same university and sharing a flat share some aspects of their Lebenswelten than,
		+	but not all. They don’t have the same family background or share the same partner.
		+	Because every human being has a different Lebenswelt it is not possible to reach an objective point of
		+	view on another culture. As scientists are humans they won’t be able to describe another culture
		+	“objectively”. But in contrary to Matthes Srubar isn’t reasoning that one can’t compare cultures at all.
		+	As the formal structure of cultures are similar, science can observe cultures in their building and
		+	processing of the structure. On all four levels of Lebenswelt every culture is producing and reproducing
		+	in medium “sense”. The outcomes of these processes are different, but the way they “become” and
		+	“make sense” is similar and can be retained. The shared structure makes it possible for scientists to
		+	write, talk and to compare cultures.
		+
		+	But how can we do justice to the differences between cultures? How is it possible to express and to
		+	compare something specific and unique with a structural language?

Notes on Srubar - Revision history

Root at 15:59, 2 September 2013

Root: /* Comparing cultures on the foundation of the concept “Lebenswelt” */

Root at 15:58, 2 September 2013

Root: Created page with "=pdf document= Media:Juliane_S_Srubarnotes.pdf"