Thesis (M.S.)--Central Connecticut State University, 2001. / Thesis advisor: Gavro Altman. " ... in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in International Studies." Includes bibliographical references (leaf [73]). Also available via the World Wide Web.

The field of cultural studies is founded upon the belief that there are no essential (ahistorical or transhistorical) limits separating theory from practice. Thus, it rejects out of hand a central principle of the West's premodern tradition of thought, which held that political theory must always be tempered by a practical awareness of human nature. The move away from this older belief in natural limits is largely carried out in the name of diversity, a sincere wish to promote openness and tolerance toward the various ends that humans may choose to pursue. Unfortunately, this ground-clearing exercise runs into certain contradictions when it is realized that absolute tolerance can provide no consistent argument against its opposite, extreme intolerance. A more subtle effect of this tolerance, however---and one that I will argue is in evidence in much cultural studies research today---is the inability to ground important political decisions. This inability leads to what Stuart Hall has called a "formalization" of the field: unwilling to commit to a particular practical vision, theory becomes locked within a self-referential sphere, or limits itself to "low risk" practical discussions (e.g., the cultural implications of record collecting). This trend towards political ineffectuality, I argue, can only be moderated by subjecting cultural studies' deepest assumptions concerning human nature to philosophical doubt. Following the argument of Leo Strauss, I propose that the most radical challenge to the mainstream of current thought is found in premodern writings. Thus, this thesis is at once a critique of the "present-mindedness" that I have witnessed in cultural studies and a limited defense of past thought.

No description available.

The first of the two essays was presented at the conference 'Ethnicity in an Age of Globalisation', held at Uganda Martyrs University, Kampala, Uganda, from 3-6 September 2001. / Thesis (MA)--University of Stellenbosch, 2002. / Babel or Piraeus? : globalisation, culture and tradition -- Between freedom and culture : Alain Finkielkraut's critique of multiculturalism. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: The conception of globalisation as a "programme" or "project" driven by a group of people or companies with a set agenda underlies much of the antagonistic discussion of globalisation. Protagonists of globalisation, in turn, often describe the process as inevitable progress. This paper analyses the process of globalisation and argues that it should not be understood as such a singular process. Rather, the concept "complex connectivity" - where the local and the global come' into closer contact and influence, or interpenetrate, one another more directly - facilitates a more nuanced analysis of globalisation -.This understanding of globalisation will be tested against the phenomenon of culture by posing two questions: Does globalisation lead to the destruction of local culture( s) by an encroaching singular global culture (i.e. is globalisation cultural imperialism)? Or alternatively: Does globalisation represent an opening .up and exchange between previously isolated cultures and societies? This paper argues in favour of the second position by employing John Tomlinson's existential definition of culture and his understanding of the dialectic that exists between the local and the global in complex connectivity. Instead of global culture, we can more properly speak of . "globalized" culture, which looks different in every local situation. This is a more optimistic answer to the cultural' effects of globalisation, and although some concerns remain, it seems clear that to understand globalisation as complex connectivity rules out many of the charges of cultural imperialism lodged against globalisation. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Baie van die hedendaagse antagonistiese diskussie oor globalisasie gaan uit van die veronderstelling dat globalisasie 'n 'program' of 'n 'projek' is wat deur 'n groep individue of maatskappye gedryf word. Voorstanders van globalisasie, daarenteen, beskou die proses dikwels as 'onafwendbare vooruitgang.' Hierdie opstel analiseer die proses van globalisasie en argumenteer dat globalisasie nie as so 'n eenduidige process verstaan moet word nie. Die konsep "complex connectivity" word ingespan om 'n meer genuanseerde analise van globalisasie te bied aangesien dit dui op die komplekse interaksie, of selfs interpenetrasie, tussen plaaslike en globale prosesse. Hierdie opvatting oor globalisasie word getoets aan die hand van kultuur deur twee teenstellende vrae te stel: Is globalisasie 'n enkelvoudige globale kultuur wat dreig om plaaslike kulture oor te neem en uiteindelik te vernietig (ook genoem kultuurimperialisme)? Of eerder: Is globalisasie 'n geleentheid tot groter openheid en interaksie tussen kulture en gemeenskappe wat voorheen van mekaar geïsoleer was? Die opstel argumenteer ten gunste van die tweede posisie deur gebruik te maak van John Tomlinson se eksistensiële definisie van kultuur en sy opvatting oor die interaksie tussen die plaaslike en die globale. Instede van globale kultuur kan ons eerder praat van 'geglobaliseerde' kultuur, wat telkens anders lyk in elke plaaslike opset. Hierdie posisie bied 'n versigtige, maar meer optimistiese antwoord op die kulturele impak van globalisasie deurdat veel van die aanklagte van kultuurimperialsime teen globalisasie afgewys word.

This work is comprised of altered, found familiar objects. They are stacked and are covered with Egyptian paste, then fired in a burn-out kiln. Through transformation by fire the objects become post-apocalyptic relics. Raised in an Irish Catholic alcoholic home by a raging perfectionist mother, the kitchen was a battlefield - the home, a place of great drama. After dish throwing and frying pan swinging, dinner was precisely laid out on a clean white tablecloth - order covering disorder. The failed domestic environment of my childhood informs this body of work and is inflected by recovering psychological states. Empowered through feminist critique and filtered through my study of Jungian psychology, these objects enact a precarious balance between the known and the estranged. Through the process of transmutation, a cathartic space is generated, giving space for viewers to potentially confront their memories of home. / by Judith Gehrmann. / Pagination goes from iv to 17. / Thesis (M.F.A.)--Florida Atlantic University, 2011. / Includes bibliography. / Electronic reproduction. Boca Raton, Fla., 2011. Mode of access: World Wide Web.

This thesis elaborates on existing definitions and descriptions of simulation to develop an extended, inter-disciplinary concept of simulation that serves as an orienting model for the interpretation of culture. As cultural theory, simulation offers insights into the stabilization and propagation of cultural forms. Used descriptively, the metaphor of simulation throws into definition a cultural pattern of progressive formalization through increasingly sophisticated methods of abstraction. I find evidence of the pattern at many levels of analysis; metaphysical, social and micro-social, particularly at the level of the body. I use the speculative notion of the digital refiguring of culture to articulate this tendency towards abstraction through a parallel with the enhanced analytic and representational capacities of digital technology. I consider several actual and hypothetical ways that the computer figures in this process. I argue that the basis for cultural form is shifting away from the referential function of the body, as the abstract realm of mediated relations takes on greater importance in modern culture.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Melbourne, Dept. of Applied Linguistics, 2009. / Typescript. Includes bibliographical references (p. 261-271)

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Brown University, 2005. / Thesis advisor: Susan Ashbrook Harvey. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 314-327). Also available online.

No description available.

This dissertation examines the issue of intercultural understanding. I explore the role played by language in constituting human subjectivity in accordance with the common insights of Ludwig Wittgenstein, Martin Heidegger, and Mikhail Mikhailovich Bakhtin, in order to: (1) affirm the complexity and fragility of the process of building understanding in fight of our immersion in specific cultural-linguistic worldviews; and (2) demonstrate that human beings are ontologically predisposed to achieve understanding, and that this ontological predisposition is enhanced by a constant and inescapable process of crossing "language boundaries" in daily life. I argue that the very manner of human induction into cultural-linguistic worldviews suggests the means by which intercultural understanding might best be fostered: through the bestowal of recognition and the cultivation of dialogical relationships. / I assemble key elements of an assortment of different theories of intercultural understanding in which these techniques are assigned a central role; this exercise generates a Wittgensteinian "perspicuous representation" of the process of crafting intercultural understanding itself, and reveals the unique strengths of two convergent approaches in particular. Both the contemporary reinterpretation of the traditional ideal of intercultural understanding of the Gitxsan and Wet'suwet'en First Nations of northwestern British Columbia, and the recent writings of Charles Taylor on the subject of international human rights standards comprise variations of what I call the "shared horizons" paradigm. The great advantages of this paradigm are its ability to address the distortive effect exercised by power inequalities upon efforts to create intercultural understanding (demonstrated through a case study of the Gitzsan-Wet'suwet'en land claim), and its amenableness to a variety of distinct culture-specific normative justifications. The shared horizons approach does not offer a blueprint for achieving intercultural understanding, but rather, a modest and adaptable set of principles that can serve as the foundation for efforts to work toward the resolution of intercultural disagreements.