In this paper I outline some ways in which philosophy can contribute to the study of culture and pluralism, and how such a study may lead to a better understanding of philosophical enquiry. Building on earlier work (Sweet, 2002), I focus on four areas in which these contributions might be made. The first concerns the methodological, ideological, and historical presuppositions of culture and multiculturalism. The second area considers how philosophical discourse affects a culture's "self-understanding". The third area focuses on how (and how far) philosophy may enable a culture to allow diversity and pluralism within the larger community. The fourth area deals with philosophy's dialectical relation with culture -how far philosophy is a product of culture, and whether that affects philosophy's participation in culture. An exploration of these areas will show both what role philosophy has to play in the analysis of culture, and why it is important for philosophers -especially in the English-speaking world- to engage in the "philosophy of culture".

L'article cherche ä demontrer que le relativisme ne constitue pas une base viable pour les reflexions sur les relations interculturelles. Contrairement ä ce que beaucoup d'intellectuels croient actuellement, le relativisme ne s'avere pas plus difficile ä defaire qu'une pensee recherchant une assise universelle pour penser les relations entre cultures. Trois points de vue importants sont abordes pour etayer la these de l'article. II y a d'abord le concept de matrice interculturelle developpee par le sociologue quebecois Jean-Jacques Simard. Selon cet auteur, les valeurs de la modernite, comme la liberte et l'egalite des personnes, sont des valeurs universelles et non propres ä la culture occidentals La modernite est en effet une matrice culturelle qui ne se cantonne pas ä une culture particuliere. Ensuite, une analyse du relativisme present chez Levi-Strauss est faite afm de montrer l'incoherence de cette approche. Pour terminer, on aborde quelques points interessants sur le relativisme apportes par Raymond Boudon, dont le concept d'axiologie est rationaliste et non consequentialiste, et qui affaiblissent le relativisme des valeurs.

Far from having overcome the human, all too human essence of knowledge the West has replaced its modern objectifying subjectivity by what may be called a postmodern subjectifying subjectivity. The modern will to power and its drive for controlling the Other has given way to a postmodern form of 'unavailability', a key concept in the ethical reflections of the Christian Socratic philosopher Gabriel Marcel. This paper attempts to highlight the degree to which fundamental features of Postmodernity, from instrumental technology to fragmented temporality and decentered subjectivity are infiltrating our existential condition. It is argued that one of the most striking symptoms of such a phenomenon is unavailability, especially in the artistic sphere.

The powerful images of the events^ of 9/11 have made an indelible impression on the world psyche. It has given rise to a pervasive rhetoric in practically all fields attempting to explain, interpret and understand the underlying causes and world changing consequences of the events. In a post-modern and secular world it has led to a refocusing on the religious fervour and ideals at work in established religions and in movements that are ostensibly devoid of all religious motivation, such as expansive globalization and American free enterprise capitalism. I argue that similar ideological and "religious" notions are at work in the conflict of worldviews represented by this historical event. In order to substantiate this claim and an identification of the ideological sources of the malaise at work in the world requires a clear distinction between religion, myth and ideology and the legitimate role played by constitutive root metaphors in culture, science and society. Root metaphor analysis reveals the underlying 'war of worlds' at work in the foundational symbolizations of the world (Gibson Winter, 1981) which function as fundamental building blocks of the "cultural cosmologies" of society (Harrington, 1995, 360). It is not only religious convictions that shape the world but the choices of metaphors by scientists, educators and politicians are not random and innocent but fraught with root metaphorical notions as religious as those of their ostensibly secular counterparts and thus laden with frameworks that dramatically alter the perception of phenomena and the behaviour and actions of groups. Harrington's (1995) analysis of the role of holism in the shadow of the Third Reich shows this very clearly. Recognition of the presence and influence of root metaphors of an ideological nature will contribute to the dies-enchantment with their allure. This paper attempts to develop a methodology on the basis of which it is possible to distinguish between the legitimate function of root metaphors in science and society and their hypostatization.

This paper focuses on the philosophical analysis of interculturality. Globalization involves the problem of the universal and its relation to the particular in cultures. In some interpretations, universality is sharply opposed to particularity (Arjun Appadurai's theory of "break" in culture). In contrast to this, there are authors who allow for both particular and universal, focusing on their interrelation. Roland Robertson shows that diversity and multiculturality do not exclude forms of cultural unity. The analysis involves the current debate regarding the term "intercultural philosophy" (Ram Adhar Mall, Franz Wimmer). Intercultural philosophy raises questions about philosophy itself, and involves the revision of the whole concept of philosophy. It brings to the forefront the problem of the interrelations between the cultural-specific and the universal in philosophy. For some philosophers, the notion intercultural seems to be incompatible with philosophy as universal knowledge. However, the adherents of interculturality develop a broader and more pluralistic concept of philosophy, viewed as embedded in certain cultural and philosophical traditions while dealing with perennial questions and aiming to give universally valid answers. Two main paradigms of interculturality are distinguished: one is Raimundo Panikkar's "intercultural-interreligious paradigm"; the other is the "intercultural-liberation paradigm" developed by Raul Fornet-Betancourt. At the heart of this analysis is Fornet- Betancourt's concept of the intercultural transformation of philosophy. It is related to interculturality, or the dialogue of cultures. It challenges the Eurocentric philosophical historiography and claims the necessity of the reconstruction of the history of ideas in Latin America, Africa, and Asia, thus creating a new view of the history of philosophy. The concept of intercultural dialogue is also considered as a "regulative idea" in creating an alternative to current globalization.

The term 'culture' has more than one meaning in different contexts. The paper attempts to show certain consequences, resulting from the ambiguous use of the term 'culture', for the protection of human rights, by comparing the use of the term in the Declaration of the Principles of International Cultural Cooperation (UNESCO 1966), with its use in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. It examines the meanings of the term 'culture' used in the UNESCO Declaration and the impact of this understanding on the protection of the relevant right or rights.

Die globalisierende Vermarktung der Welt bedroht auch die kulturelle Selbstbestimmung der Völker. Daher haben wir uns erneut und verstärkt dem Problem des Miteinanders verschiedener Kulturen zu stellen. Die Auseinandersetzung mit fremden Kulturen hat sich zunächst um das Problem des VerStehens bemüht, wie es methodologisch von der Ethnologie oder Cultural Anthropology entwickelt worden ist. Aber diesem Verstehen haftet grundsätzlich eine Einseitigkeit an. Daher wurde von politikwissenschaftlicher Seite eine Disziplin der Xenologie eingeklagt, die von einer mehrpoligen Verständigung der Kulturen untereinander ausgeht. Darüber hinaus versteht sich die neu etablierte Fragestellung der Interkulturellen Philosophie von vornherein sowohl der Doppelaufgabe von Verstehen und Verständigung verpflichtet als auch in die Schnittstelle von theoretischer und praktischer Philosophie gestellt. Die Interkulturelle Philosophie ist nicht nur ein neues Arbeitsfeld der Philosophie, sondern sie fordert vom Philosophieren insgesamt auch ein neues, sich verschiedenen kulturellen Sinnfragen öffnendes Selbstverständnis. Der Vernunftbegriff, den sie dabei zugrundelegt, ist keine vorausbestimmte Gegebenheit, sondern eine menschheitliche Aufgabe, die sie in inter kultureller Kommunikation bezogen auf ein sittliches Menschsein in der Welt zu vollbringen hat.

According to philosophical naturalism, the main anti-naturalism in philosophy derives from Kant and depends on transcendental arguments, which are invalid or polemically toothless. Many of naturalism's characteristic features follow from this repudiation of Kantian method. Anti-naturalists should be aware that the rationale for naturalism depends on this attack on their own position. There remains for philosophy a distinctively philosophical role that depends on the indexical element in our thought, the role of elaborating a scientific worldview.