The Double-Swing Model

Basic questions

How to deal with the globalised world in terms of the interpersonal, international and intercultural relations?
How to respect cultural uniqueness in terms of differences and similarities?

According to Yoshikawa, the Double-Swing model presents a way to close these gaps and supports a constructive intercultural communication between individuals and cultures. With both communicating parties understanding communication as an infinite process, they change during the intercourse and reach a higher position of tolerance and knowledge to deal with intercultural differences and similarities.

Modes of Encounter

There are different ways of encounter and communication on which Yoshikawa built his dialogical mode of communication when individuals or cultures come across.

Ethnocentric mode

Keyword: Selectiveness

Control mode

Keyword: Manipulation

Dialectical mode

Keyword: Fusion

Dialogical mode

Keyword: Interdependence

East & West perspectives

Yoshikawa's theory of the Double-Swing model and seeing persons as being complete in relationships, is based upon the Buddhist philosophy of "soku" and Austrian Jewish philosopher Martin Buber's "I-Thou Relationship".

Western Perspective: Martin Buber and his "I-Thou-Relationship"

Overall Problem: In the world collocates Unity and Diversity. How to deal with that?

Buber sees the human life in a "two-fold moment", between distance and relation.
Not carrying out a solution for the biased problem, Buber was confronted with three stages of modes before reaching his "I-Thou-Relationship" philosophy, that is positioned in the dialogical mode of communication and encounter. Trying to attain a solution in mysticism, e.g. mythologies and philosophies of Orient, he still wondered how unity is created and reached an "existential stage" since individuals are irreplaceable notwithstanding mysticism claimed.
Eventually Buber apprehends the dialogical mode and shifts into the idea of "Inter"subjective unity that can be reached best with face-to-face meetings.

Constructing his Philosophy of Dialogue he distinguishes between the related moments of "I-IT" and "I-THOU" relationships. Whilst "I-IT" abides the experience one has with an individual or a culture, forming perceived happenings into abstracted objects, the "I-THOU" part recognizes the whole living subject and the relation one has with "Thou" without restricting to few experienced points.

The Buddhist philosophy "soku"

Basic idea: Nothing in the world exists independent of a web of conditioning factors.

To deal with that idea, there are two ways: one in "Clinging" to that fact of conditioning matters and accepting that there is either one or two.
Another way is the "Middle Way" by recognizing, that there are two matters, although one cannot say whether it is one or two.

"Soku" stands for "not one, not two" and is based upon the Japanese 即非("Soku-hi), which is a term of the Kyoto School of Eastern philosophy. Yoshikawa describes, that the world is a complementary Interplay of the world of category and non-category, and uses this paradoxical relationship between "not one, not two" for his third perspective, the double-swing model.

The Double-Swing Model

Characteristics

This conceptualization has the attribute that it is neither monoistic „o“, nor dualistic „o o“, since the Möbius strip shows a clear "Identity-in-Unity" „∞”, with one point of touch during a communicational process.

“The Act of meeting between two different beings without eliminating the otherness of each other & without reducing the dynamic tension created with the meeting.”(Yoshikawa 1987:326)<ref>Yoshikawa 1987, p.326.</ref> "

The continuous process of anew creation by the dynamic flow of diaological interaction, positions both communicators into a new role: everyone is always an active creator of one's own stimuli and never a passive reactor during the communication.

Implications

Difference & otherness as positive factors -> essential for growth in communication process Communicator is always active -> never a passive reactor to communication, but an active creator of own stimuli Dynamic interplay with whole persons ->focus polar posits - not polar experiences Self & Other Awareness ->Process in which one's essential identity takes place

Critics

What to take care for if “cultures” meet? (concrete examples, best-practices)
What if own acceptance of „anew-creation“ is not given?
What about Buber‘s „narrow-ridge“ (face-to-face requirement)? Representative for western thinking?
What about the Eastern dominance in that model?

Notes

Yoshikawa pp. 326

References

Yoshikawa,Muneo:engl. Übers. “The Double-Swing Model of Cross cultural Communication between the East and the West”, in: Kincaid L., ed., Communication Theory: Eastern and Western Perspectives,New York: Academic Press,pp.319-330