True dialogue

“Dialogue between cultures should aim not at uniformity of views, but at what is called recognition in Hegelian terms”, which permits “mutual enrichment by overcoming the two opposite temptations of disparagement and a dangerous assimilation of the culture of others”, said Jesuit Father PAUL VALADIER , of the Centre de Sèvres (Paris), in his address to the International Colloquium on “The European identity and the challenges of intercultural dialogue” in Luxembourg. Promoted by the International Jacques Maritain Institute in Rome, the Italian Institute of Culture and the Pierre Werner in Luxembourg as preparation for the “European year of Intercultural Dialogue” in 2008, the meeting (which ends tomorrow) was inaugurated this morning by a welcoming address by Jacques Santer, President of the Robert Schuman Foundation, and former President of the European Commission. The need for “a European identity able to draw its cultural and political frontiers – a Europe conscious of its spiritual and moral heritage – to be asserted also at the world level” was underlined by ROBERTO PAPINI , general secretary of the Jacques Maritain Institute. He also stressed “the important role” that religions can play in intercultural dialogue as “creators of meaning”. PLURALISM. “It’s clear that cultures (or civilizations) mutually influence each other – remarked Father Valadier -; they exchange goods and services through trade”, and “by purchasing or selling their own goods, they also borrow the ways of acting, living and thinking of others; on some points they imitate each other” but “in the main they ignore, or even combat each other”, or “impose their own hegemony on each other in different ways”. “Seen from outside, Europe may seem characterized by a well-defined, strong and hegemonic identity. But it is in reality formed of a plurality of contributions”. For Europe is at one and the same time “Jerusalem, Athens and Rome, to which we would also have to add Wittenberg and Geneva”. Even language, commonly considered a unifying element of culture, is, in Father Valadier’s view, “often plural and only possesses a problematic unity, whether it be English or Arabic”. THE PRICE OF DIALOGUE . “Dialogue – explains the Jesuit – presupposes two or more persons, capable of discussion, ready to bring arguments in support of their own positions, even to rectify them in response to the objections of the interlocutors, ready even to criticise themselves, while criticising the positions of others. Dialogue invites us to express our own view as eloquently as possible, to complete it with that of our interlocutors”. This approach, according to Father Valadier, is not applicable to cultures, which “practice trade at various levels” but are “incapable of dialogue, unless it be by adopting an unreal or idealistic view of things”. Yet, if cultures are intrinsically incapable of dialogue, “there exist within them persons capable of dialogue between cultures”; they “form bridges and offer valuable chances of better understanding the values and traditions of others”, though they very clearly grasp “the price of dialogue”. For “attempting to penetrate another culture – explains Valadier – requires time, a notable effort of understanding, the learning of another language, the patient work of getting to know the population at first hand, and familiarity with its customs”. In this case, it’s not so much “a dialogue between cultures, as a dialogue between minds capable of communicating, discussing, and seeking points in common but, at the same time, underlining their real diversities”. SOURCE OF ENRICHMENT . While “the search for unifying convergences” is desirable “in the dialogue between persons, is it equally desirable in the dialogue between cultures?”. “No”, says the Jesuit, convinced that it “would be contrary to cultural pluralism. Dialogue between cultures cannot and must lead not to a levelling down, to homogenisation, but, on the contrary to an enhancement of differences: a realization that they are a source of enrichment for everyone”. Hence the importance of the Hegelian “recognition”. “Recognizing – explains Valadier – means abandoning one’s own self-sufficiency; it means admitting that humanity is vaster and more complex than might appear through our culture; it means drawing close to others with infinite respect, though this does not preclude a capacity to evaluate and judge”. “Europe must not forget that Turkey has purchased a one-way ticket for full membership of the EU”, said HALUK GUNGUR , chairman of the European Movement for Turkey, intervening in the session dedicated to Europe and its neighbours. Turkey does not want to be considered merely as “a strategically irreplaceable future member” or the object of a “privileged partnership”, he added. According to Gungur it’s important for Europe to understand that “the participation of different cultures in integration will contribute to the encounter between civilizations and to reconciliation”.