Author
Abstract
Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to show how different philosophical schools of thought view the relation between globalization and culture differently. Design/methodology/approach - This paper places the existing philosophical schools of thought into four broad categories: functionalist, interpretive, radical humanist, and radical structuralist. This paper then shows how each of these four broad categories view the relation between globalization and culture differently. Findings - This paper finds that the functionalist paradigm views globalization and culture as universal, the interpretive paradigm views globalization and culture as particular, the radical humanist paradigm views globalization and culture as a domination ideology, and the radical structuralist paradigm views globalization and culture as causing conflict between classes. Research limitations/implications - This paper assumes that each school of thought can be located in one of the four broad categories of philosophical schools of thought. However, this may not be applicable to each and every philosophical school of thought. Practical implications - This paper implies that one would benefit by becoming familiar with other ways of seeing the same phenomenon. This paper shows that the relation between globalization and culture can be viewed at least from four different vantage points and therefore one would have a better understanding of the relation between globalization and culture if one becomes familiar with all four different view points. Originality/value - The contribution of this paper is the advice that in the era of globalization it is better for people to become open‐minded because different people from different parts of the world have different perspectives and the best way to be able to live together is to learn about how others think.
Suggested Citation
Kavous Ardalan, 2009.
"Globalization and culture: four paradigmatic views,"
International Journal of Social Economics, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 36(5), pages 513-534, April.
Handle:
RePEc:eme:ijsepp:v:36:y:2009:i:5:p:513-534
DOI: 10.1108/03068290910954013
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:ijsepp:v:36:y:2009:i:5:p:513-534. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.