My teaching activity in the contemporary history department has been based upon an engaged, open, cosmopolitan climate for the past twelve years, which has in turn also been fostered by the trans-disciplinary perspective promoted by its director, Helmut Konrad. The focus on non-western studies within the contemporary history department has opened up many new possibilities, in terms of my research and teaching. The contemporary perspective on the fundamental transformation processes is heavily affected by various aspects of the modernization of society. The focus on transformation processes in former 'traditional' or 'indigenous' societies, including their 'post-colonial' political and economic structures has expanded the ethnographic, socio-ethnologic and development sociological framework anew. This inspired a fundamental cultural, historical and sociological comparison, which expounded upon the problematic aspects of geopolitics and the sociology of domination within the context of historical developments since the beginning of European colonial expansion. The new shift also contributed to a number of publications, which were regularly enhanced through discussions with engaged colleagues and students.1
Click to enlarge: International Students, Vienna
Source: Elke Stinnig
Communication crosses the boundaries between disciplines and is the basis of trans-disciplinary scientific work. Moreover, for a lecturer it is a source of enrichment to support students coming from different disciplines: historians, educators, sociologists, economists, European ethnologists, political scientists, theologians, etc. Various perspectives and 'cultural realities' are brought together not only in the curriculum but also in the social microcosm of the classroom. Often while wrestling to find common ground, students find that their respective areas of interests rest upon two shared foundations. First, that the world, and with it the scope of our thought, does not end at the borders of Europe but that beyond the historical shaping of the non-western world from a European vantage point there exists much more. The views on multifarious traces of important similarities and differences between Papua New Guinea, the Melanesian Islands or Tanzania, the Guyana region and the Southeastern Caribbean, Nepal at the foot of the Himalayas, India or the Republic of South Africa, the Buddhist Kingdom of Bhutan or Senegal, Sri Lanka, Gambia or Zimbabwe2 are all also a reflection of our own existential questions und therefore a reflection of our philosophy of knowledge in which our academic research can be understood. The second common foundation, which results from communication, is access to genuine socio-genetics within the processes of knowledge: Historical perspectives do not end in the present or in the recent past but they are instead an integral part in understanding individual, societal and scientific activity in the future.
Click to enlarge: Flags, Uno, Vienna
Quelle: Elke Stinnig
Communication can be seen as the basis for acquiring an open-mind and an understanding of the world. However, communication requires heterogeneity. Researchers who engage in discussions with only their peers, in their search for what is 'real,' 'right,' 'desirable,' or 'wrong' will come to realize but a very modest part of what there is to discover about the tangible world. Trans-cultural communication puts reality into perspective. Those who visit the far corners of this world with an open mind, divulging themselves in its diverse cultures, will have extremely heterogeneous experiences of reality, and in terms of meta-systems will be led discover joint principles. These joint principles include the fact that 'needs' of people, regardless of their culture or the time period they lived in, appear to be closely related. Whereas, the way in which these 'needs' are 'met,' by the family, through religious rituals, according to gender, through institutions, politics or economics, often appear to be heterogeneous.
To this effect the universalistic concept of 'cultural globalization' is incorrect. Thousands of cultures, languages and realities still exist on our planet, which do not revolve around the globalizing ideology of Common Sense promulgated by the societies of the global powers. Non-western societies, their lives, their perception of time, and their world views are driven by a fundamental 'Eigen-Sein,' which they refuse to let be overrun by Western economic, national, modernizing interests and practical constraints. The diversity of human expression and culture go beyond simplistic models of world interpretation. Science should no longer aim towards the convergence of cultural standards and the epistemological standardization of human beings on this planet but should become focused on accepting cultural heterogeneity and its potential for a rich source of knowledge. The 'European' archive of knowledge, mentioned briefly in the article's introduction, has of yet been only partially enriched by cultural treasures and the knowledge each region has to offer, in comparison to the enormous number of regions still to be discovered. These discoveries run in the face of the idea that the world is being reduced to a 'global village,' as non-western societies continue to be based upon the idea of self-determination and have culturally specific solutions to meet individual, social political and economic 'needs'. This evidence is still often not taken seriously by the 'West' for a variety of reasons.
1 Among others: Andreas J. Obrecht, Zeitreichtum - Zeitarmut. Von der Ordnung der Sterblichkeit zum Mythos der Machbarkeit, Frankfurt 2003; Andreas J. Obrecht, Ed., Wozu forschen? Wozu entwickeln? Möglichkeiten und Grenzen der soziologischen Forschung für eine partizipative Entwicklungszusammenarbeit, Frankfurt 2004.
2 The above mentioned countries describe the regional focus of my lectures.
--> Part 4: 'Knowledge and language '
--> back to the KEF forum 'Knowledge, Media & Networks'
