What do you think?
Rate this book
A Common Human Ground: Universality and Particularity in a Multicultural World
A great challenge of the twenty-first century is the danger of conflict between persons, peoples, and cultures, among and within societies. In A Common Human Ground , Claes Ryn explores the nature of this problem and sets forth a theory about what is necessary for peaceful relations to be possible.
Many in the Western world trust in “democracy,” “capitalism,” “liberal tolerance,” “scientific progress,” or “general enlightenment” to handle this problem. Although each of these, properly defined, may contribute toward alleviating disputes, Ryn argues that the problem is much more complex and demanding than is usually recognized. He reasons that, most fundamentally, good relations among individuals and nations have moral and cultural preconditions.
What can predispose them to mutual respect and peace? One Western philosophical tradition, for which Plato set the pattern, maintains that the only way to genuine unity is for historical diversity to yield to universality. The implication of this view for a multicultural world would be a peace that requires that cultural distinctiveness be effaced as far as possible and replaced with a universal culture. A very different Western philosophical tradition denies the existence of universality altogether. It is represented today by postmodernist multiculturalism—a view that leaves unanswered the question as to how conflict between diverse groups might be averted.
Ryn questions both of these traditions, arguing for the potential union of universality and particularity. He contends that the two need not be enemies, but in fact need each other. Cultivating individual and national particularities is potentially compatible with strengthening and enriching our common humanity. This volume embraces the notion of universality, while at the same time historicizing it.
Using wide-ranging examples, Ryn presents a firmly sustained and systematic argument centering on this central issue. His approach is interdisciplinary, discussing not only political ideas, but also fiction, drama, and other arts. Scholarly and philosophical, but not specialized, this book will appeal to general readers as well as intellectuals.
Many in the Western world trust in “democracy,” “capitalism,” “liberal tolerance,” “scientific progress,” or “general enlightenment” to handle this problem. Although each of these, properly defined, may contribute toward alleviating disputes, Ryn argues that the problem is much more complex and demanding than is usually recognized. He reasons that, most fundamentally, good relations among individuals and nations have moral and cultural preconditions.
What can predispose them to mutual respect and peace? One Western philosophical tradition, for which Plato set the pattern, maintains that the only way to genuine unity is for historical diversity to yield to universality. The implication of this view for a multicultural world would be a peace that requires that cultural distinctiveness be effaced as far as possible and replaced with a universal culture. A very different Western philosophical tradition denies the existence of universality altogether. It is represented today by postmodernist multiculturalism—a view that leaves unanswered the question as to how conflict between diverse groups might be averted.
Ryn questions both of these traditions, arguing for the potential union of universality and particularity. He contends that the two need not be enemies, but in fact need each other. Cultivating individual and national particularities is potentially compatible with strengthening and enriching our common humanity. This volume embraces the notion of universality, while at the same time historicizing it.
Using wide-ranging examples, Ryn presents a firmly sustained and systematic argument centering on this central issue. His approach is interdisciplinary, discussing not only political ideas, but also fiction, drama, and other arts. Scholarly and philosophical, but not specialized, this book will appeal to general readers as well as intellectuals.
168 pages, Hardcover
First published November 1, 2003
3 people are currently reading
22 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
December 29, 2022
I loved this book and I feel Ryn is criminally underrated as a political philosopher and should be far more widely read.
Ryn comes to the real problem of both rejecting missionary assimilationism and absolute universalism as well as postmodern/huntingtonian relativism by creating a synthesis point where universal self-betterment is assisted rather than sabotaged by cultural and intellectual diversity.
He is writing as a universalist (albeit a rare smart one) and I am reading it as a relativist (albeit very much NOT a postmodern/idealist one) and its remarkable how much we come together despite our different origin points. Kind of proves his overall point.
Which is not to say that I endorse all of his views. In fact, since I reject abstract concepts of 'the good' or the desirability of ethical convergence on all things, I would say we still have some fairly significant differences. However, while Ryn talks about a true cosmopolitanism being the acceptance of difference and the ability to learn from it, our purposes are the same. I see this book being vital for diplomats in particular in underlining how their profession relies on both the acceptance of divergence but for mutually constructive benefit.
Ryn comes to the real problem of both rejecting missionary assimilationism and absolute universalism as well as postmodern/huntingtonian relativism by creating a synthesis point where universal self-betterment is assisted rather than sabotaged by cultural and intellectual diversity.
He is writing as a universalist (albeit a rare smart one) and I am reading it as a relativist (albeit very much NOT a postmodern/idealist one) and its remarkable how much we come together despite our different origin points. Kind of proves his overall point.
Which is not to say that I endorse all of his views. In fact, since I reject abstract concepts of 'the good' or the desirability of ethical convergence on all things, I would say we still have some fairly significant differences. However, while Ryn talks about a true cosmopolitanism being the acceptance of difference and the ability to learn from it, our purposes are the same. I see this book being vital for diplomats in particular in underlining how their profession relies on both the acceptance of divergence but for mutually constructive benefit.
Displaying 1 of 1 review