Is culture something we have or something we do? | Culture and communication in digital worlds

Author(s): Øyvind Dahl

Year of publication: 2014

Keywords: Essentialist culture, Constructivist culture, Cultural hybridity, Globalization, Cultural codes, Cultural encounters, Power relations, Intercultural communication, Dynamic culture

Methodology/Sample: _/_

Reference: Dahl, Ø. (2014). Is culture something we have or something we do?. Journal of Intercultural Communication, 14(3), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.36923/jicc.v14i3.678

Abstract

The descriptive understanding of culture is essentialist. One assumes that a group of people share values, codes and norms. Culture is according to this understanding something people have. People belong to this or that culture, and once one has learned the cultural codes one may predict how people behave. In the global world this understanding of culture has become more problematic. Cultures are mixed and more or less shared across the globe. Cultures have become hybrids where some elements are shared, others are not. The dynamic understanding of culture is constructivist. Culture is not something people have, but something they construct in specific human encounters where mutual relations and power are part of the context. Meanings are shared, interpreted and created when people do something together i.e. when they communicate.

> Summary

The paper discusses the complexities of intercultural communication and the importance of understanding cultural customs.
It highlights the dynamic constructivist approach to culture, emphasizing that cultures are not fixed but constantly evolving.
The Dalai Lama’s greeting customs illustrate the significance of respecting cultural practices during interactions.
The paper critiques essentialist views of culture, advocating for a more nuanced understanding of cultural interactions.

> Problem statement

The paper discusses the confusion arising from cultural misunderstandings during greetings, exemplified by the Dalai Lama and the Swedish king’s interaction.
It highlights the essentialist view of culture as problematic in a globalized world, where cultures are mixed and hybridized.
The need for awareness of cultural differences in communication is emphasized, particularly in intercultural encounters.
The paper questions the effectiveness of cultural protocols, suggesting that better preparation could have facilitated smoother interactions.

> Methods used

The paper employs a dynamic constructivist cultural approach, emphasizing that culture is complex and always changing.
A phenomenological approach is utilized, focusing on observing interactions and evaluating different interpretations and meanings.
The research highlights the importance of intersubjective agreements among individuals within a community of interpretation.
The study critiques essentialist views of culture, advocating for a constructivist understanding where culture is created through human encounters.

> Practical implications

Understanding cultural differences enhances respect in intercultural interactions, as demonstrated by the Dalai Lama’s greeting customs.
The dynamic constructivist approach emphasizes that culture is constructed through interactions, influencing communication strategies.
Recognizing the importance of deep culture can prevent misunderstandings in cross-cultural encounters.
The paper highlights the need for cultural awareness to foster better relationships in diverse settings.
It suggests adapting to local customs, like the Dalai Lama’s namaste, to show respect.