Suchergebnisse

Alexithymia refers to difficulty with reflecting on and articulating emotional states. Previous research has found that Asian groups may tend toward greater alexithymia and that cultural values may mediate this difference, although the content of Asian values that form these pathways is unclear. This study examined the relationship between Confucian values, ethnicity, and alexithymia. A sample of 216 undergraduate students completed the Chinese Value Survey and the Toronto Alexithymia Scale. Asian Canadians scored more highly on alexithymia than non-Asian Canadians. Individuals who valued trustworthiness, patience, and kindness were found to be less alexithymic. The ability to be a source of kindness and security to others may be tied to the development of reflective awareness. Individuals who valued purity from desire and respect for social order were found to be more alexithymic. Such individuals may tend not to reflect on impure or socially disruptive thoughts and feelings. Values associated with purity and order mediated the difference between Asians and non-Asians on alexithymia. Asian Canadians may therefore score more highly on alexithymia because they prefer not to reflect on emotions associated with impurity or social disorder.

Introduction : cultural values in political economy / J.P. Singh -- Culture and preference formation / Daniel M. Hausman -- Value and values in economics and culture / David Throsby -- Creating a culture of environmental responsibility / Sharon R. Krause -- Cosmopolitans and parochials : economy, culture, and political conflict / Miles Kahler -- Crossing borders : culture, identity, and access to higher education / Steven Livingston -- Ideology, economic interests, and American exceptionalism : the case of export credit / Kristen Hopewell -- Strangest of bedfellows : why the religious right embraced Trump and what that means for the movement / Mark J. Rozell -- Applying the soft power rubric : how study abroad data reveals international cultural relations / Irene S. Wu.

The presumption of this paper is the view of multi‐culturalism as a concept grounded on an assumption, rather than data, and legitimized by proclamation, rather than legislation. Multi‐culturalism as a socio‐political construction is not only "a multi‐cultural and multi‐religious mosaic", but it has its own values. The new borders inside the European Union (EU) are non‐territorial, which confirms the new paradigm about the weakening factor of territorial belonging as such. Nowadays, values become a more and more powerful source of demarcation. The aim of this article is to challenge the problem and its consequences for the identity and perception of values in the new European situation, in which borders are merely symbolic. Multi‐culturalism is the revalorization of ethnocentric tradition and the creation of post‐materialist values such as individual self‐expression, personal transformation, openness and solidarity to others, gender and racial equality, greater tolerance for an ethnic, cultural and religious diversity. Daugiakultūrės vertybės ir ribos Santrauka.Daugiakultūriškumas apžvelgiamas kaip konceptas, labiau grindžiamas prielaidomis, o ne žiniomis; įteisinamas diskursu, o ne teise. Daugiakultūriškumas kaip socio-politinis konstruktas nėra vien tik daugiakultūrė ir daugiareligė mozaika – jam būdingos savarankiškos vertybės. Naujos sienos Europos Sąjungoje (ES) yra neteritorinės, jos įtvirtina naują paradigmą, pagrįstą konkretaus teritorinio veiksnio susilpnėjimu. Mūsų dienomis vertybės tampa vis svarbesniu demarkacijos šaltiniu. Šio straipsnio tikslas – iškelti daugiakultūriškumo problemą ir jo įtaką tapatumui bei vertybių suvokimui naujoje Europos situacijoje, kai sienos tėra simbolinės. Daugiakultūriškumas – tai etnocentrinės tradicijos perkainojimas ir kūrimas tokių post-materialistinių vertybių, kaip individuali saviraiška, asmeninė transformacija, atvirumas ir solidarumas, lytinė ir rasinė lygybė, didesnė tolerancija etniniam, kultūriniam ir religiniam skirtingumui. Reikšminiai žodžiai: ...

The presumption of this paper is the view of multi‐culturalism as a concept grounded on an assumption, rather than data, and legitimized by proclamation, rather than legislation. Multi‐culturalism as a socio‐political construction is not only "a multi‐cultural and multi‐religious mosaic", but it has its own values. The new borders inside the European Union (EU) are non‐territorial, which confirms the new paradigm about the weakening factor of territorial belonging as such. Nowadays, values become a more and more powerful source of demarcation. The aim of this article is to challenge the problem and its consequences for the identity and perception of values in the new European situation, in which borders are merely symbolic. Multi‐culturalism is the revalorization of ethnocentric tradition and the creation of post‐materialist values such as individual self‐expression, personal transformation, openness and solidarity to others, gender and racial equality, greater tolerance for an ethnic, cultural and religious diversity. Daugiakultūrės vertybės ir ribos Santrauka Daugiakultūriškumas apžvelgiamas kaip konceptas, labiau grindžiamas prielaidomis, o ne žiniomis; įteisinamas diskursu, o ne teise. Daugiakultūriškumas kaip socio-politinis konstruktas nėra vien tik daugiakultūrė ir daugiareligė mozaika – jam būdingos savarankiškos vertybės. Naujos sienos Europos Sąjungoje (ES) yra neteritorinės, jos įtvirtina naują paradigmą, pagrįstą konkretaus teritorinio veiksnio susilpnėjimu. Mūsų dienomis vertybės tampa vis svarbesniu demarkacijos šaltiniu. Šio straipsnio tikslas – iškelti daugiakultūriškumo problemą ir jo įtaką tapatumui bei vertybių suvokimui naujoje Europos situacijoje, kai sienos tėra simbolinės. Daugiakultūriškumas – tai etnocentrinės tradicijos perkainojimas ir kūrimas tokių post-materialistinių vertybių, kaip individuali saviraiška, asmeninė transformacija, atvirumas ir solidarumas, lytinė ir rasinė lygybė, didesnė tolerancija etniniam, kultūriniam ir religiniam skirtingumui. Reikšminiai žodžiai: daugiakultūriškumas, daugiakultūrės strategijos, daugiakultūrės vertybės, religinės ribos, religinis pliuralizmas. First Published Online: 14 Oct 2010

"Using experimental surveys as a primary source, Kim and Kim compare a wide range of developed countries to assess the determinants of generalized social trust. With data from Belgium, France, Italy, Japan, Singapore, South Korea, the Netherlands, and the United States, Kim and Kim present a detailed picture of trust at the individual level, across different ethnic groups, and across different regions with economic and cultural distinctions. They focus on a range of concepts, including generalized trust and familism; causal relationships among cultural values, particularized trust, and institutional trust at the individual level; and relationships between culture, wealth, and governance at the macro level. In doing so, they consolidate substantial quantitative data with rigorous theoretical analysis and advance our understanding of social trust and prosociality in general. A valuable resource for researchers and advanced students in political science, sociology, and social psychology around the world"--

"Using experimental surveys as a primary source, Kim and Kim compare a wide range of developed countries to assess the determinants of generalized social trust. With data from Belgium, France, Italy, Japan, Singapore, South Korea, the Netherlands, and the United States, Kim and Kim present a detailed picture of trust at the individual level, across different ethnic groups, and across different regions with economic and cultural distinctions. They focus on a range of concepts, including generalized trust and familism; causal relationships among cultural values, particularized trust, and institutional trust at the individual level; and relationships between culture, wealth, and governance at the macro level. In doing so, they consolidate substantial quantitative data with rigorous theoretical analysis and advance our understanding of social trust and prosociality in general. A valuable resource for researchers and advanced students in political science, sociology, and social psychology around the world"--

The presumption of this paper is the view of multi‐culturalism as a concept grounded on an assumption, rather than data, and legitimized by proclamation, rather than legislation. Multi‐culturalism as a socio‐political construction is not only "a multi‐cultural and multi‐religious mosaic", but it has its own values. The new borders inside the European Union (EU) are non‐territorial, which confirms the new paradigm about the weakening factor of territorial belonging as such. Nowadays, values become a more and more powerful source of demarcation. The aim of this article is to challenge the problem and its consequences for the identity and perception of values in the new European situation, in which borders are merely symbolic. Multi‐culturalism is the revalorization of ethnocentric tradition and the creation of post‐materialist values such as individual self‐expression, personal transformation, openness and solidarity to others, gender and racial equality, greater tolerance for an ethnic, cultural and religious diversity.