Suchergebnisse

The image of the European culture is given by the association of the concepts people – culture – history – territory, which provides certain local features. From this relation, we identify a cultural area with local, regional and national features beyond a certain European culture. Thus, we identify at least two cultural identity constructions on the European level: a culture of cultures, that is a cultural area with a particular, local, regional and national strong identity, or a cultural archipelago, that is a common yet disrupted cultural area. Whatever the perspective, the existence of a European cultural area cannot be denied, although one may speak of diversity or of "disrupted continuity".
The paper is a survey on the European cultural space in two aspects: 1. Europe with internal cultural border areas; 2. Europe as external cultural-identity border area. From a methodological point of view, we have to point out that despite the two-levelled approach the two conceptual constructions do not exclude each other: the concept of "culture of cultures" designs both a particular and a general identity area. The specific of the European culture is provided precisely by diversity and multiculturalism as means of expression on local, regional, or national levels. Consequently, the European cultural area is an area with a strong identity on both particular and general levels.

The purpose of the article is to reveal the peculiarities of cultural diffusion as a phenomenon of the sociocultural space based on the analysis of the cultural discourse of the first decades of the 21st century. Research methodology. An analytical method, a terminological analysis method (to clarify the concept of "cultural diffusion"), a systemic method (to consider cultural diffusion as a complex multifaceted system), a comparative analysis method (to identify differences in the mechanisms and types of cultural diffusion), and a generalisation method were applied. Scientific novelty. On the basis of the analysis of the modern cultural discourse, the peculiarities of the phenomenon of cultural diffusion in the socio-cultural space were revealed; the factors affecting cultural diffusion were considered, the process and influence of cultural diffusion were investigated; analysed four types of cultural diffusion (direct, indirect, forced and stimulus diffusion), theories and models explaining the mechanisms and results of cultural diffusion. Conclusions. Based on the analysis of the scientific works of modern foreign researchers on the theory of cultural diffusion, it was found that this phenomenon means the spread of cultural objects (ideas, styles, religions, technologies, languages, fashion) within or between cultures and gained popularity in the 20th century thanks to the theory of the famous anthropologist A. Kreber. Scientists identify three mechanisms (the theory of diffusion of innovations, hierarchical diffusion model, contagious diffusion model) through which cultural diffusion occurs and four main types (direct, indirect, forced and stimulating diffusion), which are distinguished by specific processes of spread and rooting in new environments. The study of cultural diffusion is a promising direction of cultural studies, as it contributes to the understanding and comprehension of the intricate network of influences and borrowings that form the modern socio-cultural space.

Abstract: I defend cultural relativism against the following objections: (i) The analogy between motion and morality is flawed. (ii) Cultural relativism has greater potential to be harmful to our daily lives than is cultural absolutism. (iii) We made moral progress when we
moved from slavery to equality. (iv) There are some moral principles that are accepted by all cultures around the world. (v) Moral argumentation is impossible within the framework of cultural relativism. (vi) We construct arguments for and against cultures.

ABSTRACT  The paper begins with a discussion of the definition of cultural industries. The paper's three main themes are concerned with, first: 1) a contestation of the generic application of the global commodity chain concept, 2) the need for a unique focus on cultural industries associated with the particular nature of its production process, and 3) the role of embedded judgments of quality is an integral part of this process. Second, the paper suggests that a restyled focus on production chains (involving the full cycle of production to use) might be more appropriate than "commodity chains" for this application. Finally, issues of spatiality and scale are discussed: it is argued that although global commodity chain debates explore linkages at a regional and national scale, they downplay linkages at the local level.

"Cultural Democracy", like many cultural policy themes, has different meanings, relevance and importance depending on the political, economic, cultural and social contexts in which it is applied. "Democratising culture" - implementing strategies to increase access to and the dissemination of ideas and values - has certainly been aided by the arrival of the internet, but it remains those with resources, with networks, with expertise and historical privilege, who are best able to assert their values, ideas, beliefs and ideological assumptions: what hopes then, for a more democratic world order, in which everyone - or at least the majority of people - may be able to project their views, traditions, values and perspectives into the "global market of ideas"? My reflections on this theme will be informed by my South African experience, by my serving as part of UNESCO's technical facility on the 2005 Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions, and my work within cultural policy across the African continent. I will begin this reflection with reference to my home country, South Africa, as a metaphor for the world.

"Cultural Democracy", like many cultural policy themes, has different meanings, relevance and importance depending on the political, economic, cultural and social contexts in which it is applied. "Democratising culture" - implementing strategies to increase access to and the dissemination of ideas and values - has certainly been aided by the arrival of the internet, but it remains those with resources, with networks, with expertise and historical privilege, who are best able to assert their values, ideas, beliefs and ideological assumptions: what hopes then, for a more democratic world order, in which everyone - or at least the majority of people - may be able to project their views, traditions, values and perspectives into the "global market of ideas"? My reflections on this theme will be informed by my South African experience, by my serving as part of UNESCO's technical facility on the 2005 Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions, and my work within cultural policy across the African continent. I will begin this reflection with reference to my home country, South Africa, as a metaphor for the world.

Russia presents specific mosaic, consisted from many peoples. They are different in size and in strength of inner connections, in economic and social characteristics, level of political organization, language and culture, spiritual features and national character. In such context the problem of multi-cultural education becomes very actual and complicated in terms of polyethnical Russian society.