Families in Global and Multicultural Perspective. Second Edition
Beyond Cultural Identity: Reflections on Multiculturalism
Originally published in Civilization Learning, East-W Center Press, Richard Brislin, Editor, 1977, pp. 24-41, so republished Intercultural Communication edited by Larry Samovar and Richard Porter, Wadsworth Publishing Company, 1976, pp. 362-378.
INTRODUCTION
Multiculturalism i is an bonny and persuasive notion. Information technology suggests a human existence whose identifications and loyalties transcend the boundaries of nationalism and whose commitments are pinned to a larger vision of the global community. To be a citizen of the earth, an international person, has long been an ideal toward which many strive. Unfortunately, history is also rich with examples of totalitarian societies and individuals who took it upon themselves to shape everyone else to the mold of their planetary vision. Repulsive as it was, Hitler had a vision of a world club.
Less common are examples of men and women who accept striven to sustain a self-process that is inclusively international in attitude and behavior. For good reason. Nation, culture, and social club exert tremendous influence on each of our lives, structuring our values, applied science our view of the world, and patterning our responses to experience. Human beings cannot agree themselves apart from some grade of cultural influence. No 1 is culture free. Yet, the conditions of contemporary history are such that nosotros may now be on the threshold of a new kind of person, a person who is socially and psychologically a product of the interweaving of cultures in the twentieth century.
We are reminded daily of this phenomenon. In the corner of a traditional Japanese home sits a idiot box set tuned to a baseball game in which the visitors, an American squad, are losing. A Canadian family, meanwhile, decorates their dwelling with sculptures and paintings imported from Pakistan, India, and Ceylon. Teenagers in Singapore and Hong Kong pay unheard of prices for used American blue jeans while high school students in England and France accept courses on the making of traditional Indonesian batik. A team of Malaysian physicians inoculates a remote hamlet against typhus while their Western counterparts study Auryvedic medicine and acupuncture. Around the planet the streams of the world's cultures merge together to form new currents of homo interaction. Though superficial and just a manifestation of the shrinking of the globe, each such vignette is a symbol of the mingling and melding of human being cultures. Communication and cultural substitution are the preeminent conditions of the twentieth century.
For the outset fourth dimension in the history of the earth, a patchwork of technology and organization has made possible simultaneous interpersonal and intercultural communication. Innovations and refinements of innovations, including modems, electronic mail, facsimile machines, digital recording, cable television, satellite dishes, and desktop publishing have brought people everywhere into potential contact. Barely a city or village exists that is more than a solar day or ii from anyplace else: almost no town or community is without a tv set. Bus lines, railroads, highways, and airports have created linkages within and between local, regional, national, and international levels of human being organization. The impact is enormous. Human connections through advice have made possible the interchange of appurtenances, products, and services equally well every bit the more significant substitution of thoughts and ideas. Accompanying the growth of human communication has been the erosion of barriers that have, throughout history, geographically, linguistically, and culturally separated people. Equally Harold Lasswell (1972) once suggested, "The technological revolution as it affects mass media has reached a limit that is field of study only to innovations that would substantially alter our basic perspectives of one another and of man's place in the cosmos." It is possible that the emergence of the multicultural person is just such an innovation.
A NEW KIND OF PERSON
A new type of person whose orientation and view of the world greatly transcends his or her indigenous civilisation is developing from the circuitous of social, political, economic, and educational interactions of our fourth dimension. The various conceptions of an "international," "transcultural," "multicultural," or "intercultural" individual have each been used with varying degrees of explanatory or descriptive utility. Substantially, they all endeavor to define someone whose horizons extend significantly beyond his or her own culture. An "internationalist," for example, has been defined as a person who trusts other nations, is willing to cooperate with other countries, perceives international agencies as potential deterrents to war, and who considers international tensions reducible past mediation (Lutzker 1960). Others have studied the international orientation of groups by measuring their attitudes towards international bug, i.e., the role of the U.Northward., economical versus military assistance, international alliances, etc. (Campbell, Gurin and Miller 1954). And at least several attempts have been made to measure the world-mindedness of individuals by exploring the degree to which persons accept a broad international frame of reference rather than specific knowledge or involvement in some narrower attribute of global affairs (Sampson and Smith 1957, Garrison 1961, Paul 1966).
Whatever the terminology, the definitions and metaphors insinuate to a person whose essential identity is inclusive of different life patterns and who has psychologically and socially come to grips with a multiplicity of realities. We tin can call this new type of person multicultural because he or she embodies a core procedure of self-verification that is grounded in both the universality of the human condition and the diversity of cultural forms. We are speaking, then, of a social-psychological style of self-process that differs from others. The multicultural person is intellectually and emotionally committed to the basic unity of all human beings while at the same time recognizing, legitimizing, accepting, and appreciating the differences that exist between people of dissimilar cultures. This new kind of person cannot be divers by the languages he or she speaks, the number of countries he or she has visited, nor by the number of personal international contacts that have been made. Nor is he or she defined by profession, identify of residence, or cognitive composure. Instead, the multicultural person is recognized by a configuration of outlooks and world-view, by how the universe every bit a dynamically moving procedure is incorporated, by the way the interconnectedness of life is reflected in thought and action, and past the way this woman or homo remains open up to the imminence of experience.
The multicultural person is, at one time, both old and new. On the one manus, this involves being the timeless "universal" person described over again and again by philosophers through the ages. He or she approaches, at least in the attributions we make, the classical ideal of a person whose lifestyle is one of noesis and wisdom, integrity and management, principle and fulfillment, balance and proportion. "To be a universal homo," wrote John Walsh (1973) using "man" in the traditional sense of including men and women, "means not how much a human knows simply what intellectual depth and breadth he has and how he relates it to other central and universally important problems." What is universal nearly the multicultural person is an constant commitment to the essential similarities between people everywhere, while paradoxically maintaining an equally stiff delivery to differences. The universal person, suggests Walsh, "does non at all eliminate civilization differences." Rather, he or she "seeks to preserve whatsoever is virtually valid, significant, and valuable in each civilisation as a way of enriching and helping to form the whole." In his apotheosis of the universal and the particular, the multicultural person is a descendant of the bully philosophers of both the East and the West.
On the other mitt, what is new most this type of person, and unique to our time, is a fundamental change in the structure and process of identity. The identity of the "multicultural," far from beingness frozen in a social character, is more than fluid and mobile, more than susceptible to change, more open to variation. It is an identity based not on a "belongingness" which implies either owning or beingness endemic by culture, but on a style of self-consciousness that is capable of negotiating ever new formations of reality. In this sense the multicultural person is a radical departure from the kinds of identities found in both traditional and mass societies. He or she is neither totally a role of nor totally apart from his or her culture; instead, he or she lives on the boundary. To live on the border of one's thinking, one'due south culture, or i'due south ego, suggested Paul Tillich (1966), is to alive with tension and movement. "It is in truth non standing still, merely rather a crossing and render, a repetition of return and crossing, back-and-forth--the aim of which is to create a third expanse beyond the bounded territories, an surface area where one tin stand for a time without beingness enclosed in something tightly bounded." Multiculturalism, then is an outgrowth of the complexities of the twentieth century. Equally unique as this kind of person may be, the mode of identity that is embodied arises from the myriad of forms that are present in this twenty-four hours and age. An agreement of this new kind of person must be predicated on a clear understanding of cultural identity.
THE CONCEPT OF CULTURAL IDENTITY: A PSYCHOCULTURAL FRAMEWORK
The concept of cultural identity can past used in 2 different ways. First, it tin can exist employed as a reference to the collective self-sensation that a given group embodies and reflects. This is the most prevalent use of the term. "Generally," writes Stephen Bochner (1973), "the cultural identity of a order is defined past its majority group, and this group is ordinarily quite distinguishable from the minority sub-groups with whom they share the physical environment and the territory that they inhabit." With the emphasis upon the grouping, the concept is akin to the idea of a national or social grapheme which describes a set of traits that members of a given community share with one another above and beyond their individual differences. Such traits almost always include a constellation of values and attitudes towards life, expiry, birth, family unit, children, god, and nature. Used in its collective sense, the concept of cultural identity includes typologies of cultural behavior, such behaviors beingness the appropriate and inappropriate ways of coming together basic needs and solving life's essential dilemmas. Used in its collective sense, the concept of cultural identity incorporates the shared premises, values, definitions, and behavior and the day-to-twenty-four hours, largely unconscious, patterning of activities.
A 2nd, more specific use of the concept revolves around the identity of the private in relation to his or her civilization. Cultural identity, in the sense that it is a performance aspect of individual personality, is a fundamental symbol of a person's existence. It is in reference to the private that the concept is used in this newspaper. In psychoanalytic literature, nearly notably in the writing of Erik Erikson (1959), identity is an elemental grade of psychic organization which develops in successive psychosexual phases throughout life. Erikson, who focused the greater portion of his analytic studies on identity conflicts, recognized the anchoring of the ego in a larger cultural context. Identity, he suggested, takes a variety of forms in the individual. "At in one case," he wrote, "it will appear to refer to a conscious sense of individual identity: at some other to an unconscious striving for a continuity of personal character: at a third, equally a criterion for the silent doings of ego synthesis: and, finally, as a maintenance of an inner solidarity with a group'southward ethics and identity." The analytic perspective, as voiced past Erikson, is only one of a variety of definitions. Almost always, however, the concept of identity is meant to imply a coherent sense of self that depends on a stability of values and a sense of wholeness and integration.
How, then, can nosotros conceptualize the interplay of culture and personality? Culture and personality are inextricably woven together in the gestalt of each person's identity. Civilization, the mass of life patterns that homo beings in a given society learn from their elders and pass on to the younger generation, is imprinted in the private as a pattern of perceptions that is accepted and expected past others in a society (Singer 1971). Cultural identity is the symbol of one's essential experience of oneself as it incorporates the worldview, value organization, attitudes, and beliefs of a grouping with which such elements are shared. In its virtually manifest form, cultural identity takes the shape of names which both locate and differentiate the person. When an individual calls himself or herself an American, a Buddhist, a Democrat, a Dane, a woman, or John Jones, that person is symbolizing parts of the complex of images that are likewise recognizable by others. The deeper construction of cultural identity is a cloth of such images and perceptions embedded in the psychological posture of the private. At the center of this matrix of images is a psychocultural fusion of biological, social, and philosophical motivations; this fusion, a synthesis of culture and personality, is the operant person.
The middle, or core, of cultural identity is an image of the self and the civilisation intertwined in the private's total formulation of reality. This image, a patchwork of internalized roles, rules, and norms, functions equally the coordinating mechanism in personal and interpersonal situations. The "mazeway," as Anthony Wallace (1956) called it, is made upward of human, non-human, material, and abstruse elements of the culture. Information technology is the "stuff" of both personality and civilization. The mazeway, suggested Wallace, is the patterned image of guild and culture, personality and nature all of which is ingrained in the person'due south symbolization of self. A system of culture, he writes, "depends relatively more on the ability of constituent units autonomously to perceive the system of which they are a part, to receive and transmit data, and to human action in accord with the necessities of the organisation...." The image, or mazeway, of cultural identity is the gyroscope of the functioning individual. It mediates, arbitrates, and negotiates the life of the individual. Information technology is within the context of this central, navigating paradigm that the fusion of biological, social, and philosophical realities form units of integration that are important to a comparative assay of cultural identity. The way in which these units are knit together and contoured past the culture at large determines the parameters of the private. This purlieus of cultural identity plays a big part in determining the individual'south ability to chronicle to other cultural systems.
All human being beings share a like biological science, universally express by the rhythms of life. All individuals in all races and cultures must motility through life's phases on a like schedule: birth, infancy, adolescence, middle age, one-time historic period, and death. Similarly, humans everywhere embody the same physiological functions of ingestion, irritability, metabolic equilibrium, sexuality, growth, and decay. Notwithstanding the ultimate interpretation of human biology is a cultural phenomenon: that is, the meanings of human biological patterns are culturally derived. It is culture which dictates the meanings of sexuality, the ceremonials of birth, the transitions of life, and the rituals of death. The capacity for language, for case, is universally accepted as a biological given. Any kid, given unimpaired apparatus for hearing, vocalizing, and thinking, can acquire to speak and understand any human linguistic communication. Yet the language that is learned by a child depends solely upon the identify and the way of rearing. Kluckhohn and Leighton (1970), in outlining the grammatical and phonetic systems of the Navajo, argued that patterns of linguistic communication affect the expression of ideas and very perhaps more than fundamental processes of thinking. Benjamin Whorf (1957) further suggested that language may not be but an inventory of linguistic items simply rather "itself the shaper of ideas, the program and guide for the individual's mental activity."2
The interaction of civilization and biology provides one cornerstone for an understanding of cultural identity. How each private's biological situation is given meaning becomes a psychobiological unit of integration and analysis. Humanity's essential physiological needs -- food, sex activity, avoidance of pain, etc. -- are 1 part of the reality pattern of cultural identity. Some other part consists of those drives that attain out to the social order. At this psychosocial level of integration, generic needs are channeled and organized by culture. The needs for affection, acceptance, recognition, affiliation, status, belonging, and interaction with other human beings are enlivened and given recognizable grade by culture. We can, for example, run into clearly the intersection of culture and the psychosocial level of integration in comparative status responses. In the Us economic condition is demonstrated past the conspicuous consumption of products while among the Kwakiutl Indians, status is gained past giving all possessions away in the "potlatch". In many Asian societies age confers status and contempt or disrespect for quondam people represents a serious alienation of acquit demanding confront-saving measures.
It is the unwritten task of every culture to organize, integrate, and maintain the psychosocial patterns of the individual, particularly in the formative years of babyhood. Each culture engineers such patterns in ways that are unique, coherent, and logical to the conditions and predispositions that underlie the culture. This imprinting of the forms of interconnection that are needed past the individual for psychosocial survival, acceptance, and enrichment is a significant role of the socialization and enculturation process. Yet of equal importance in the imprinting is the structuring of college forms of individual consciousness. Culture gives meaning and grade to those drives and motivations that extend towards an understanding of the cosmological ordering of the universe. All cultures, in 1 manner or another, invoke the great philosophical questions of life: the origin and destiny of being, the nature of knowledge, the meaning of reality, the significance of the homo experience. As Murdock (1955) suggested in "Universals of Culture," some form of cosmology, ideals, mythology, supernatural propitiation, religious rituals, and soul concept appears in every culture known to history or ethnography. How an individual raises these questions and searches for ultimate answers is a role of the psychophilosophical patterning of cultural identity. Ultimately it is the task of every individual to relate to his or her god, to bargain with the supernatural, and to incorporate for himself or herself the mystery of life. The ways in which individuals do this, the relationships and connections that are formed, are a function of the psychophilosophical component of cultural identity.
A conceptualization of cultural identity, and so, must include three interrelated levels of integration and analysis. While the cultural identity of an individual is comprised of symbols and images that signify aspects of these levels, the psychobiological, psychosocial, and psychophilosophical realities of an private are knit together by the culture which operates through sanctions and rewards, totems and taboos, prohibitions and myths. The unity and integration of society, nature, and the cosmos is reflected in the total image of the self and in the day-to-day awareness and consciousness of the private. This synthesis is modulated by the larger dynamics of the culture itself. In the concept of cultural identity we see a synthesis of the operant culture reflected by the deepest images held by the private. These images, in plow, are based on universal human being motivations.
Implicit in any analysis of cultural identity is a configuration of motivational needs. As the tardily Abraham Maslow (1962) suggested, human drives form a hierarchy in which the nigh prepotent motivations will monopolize consciousness and will tend, of themselves, to organize the diverse capacities and capabilities of the organism. In the sequence of development, the needs of infancy and babyhood circumduct primarily effectually physiological and biological necessities, i.due east., nourishment by food, water, and warmth. Correspondingly, psychosocial needs are most profound in adolescence and immature adulthood when the people engage in establishing themselves through mar "un-becoming" something different from earlier while nonetheless mindful of the grounding in his or her master cultural reality. Stated differently, the multicultural individual is propelled from identity to identity through a procedure of both cultural learning and cultural un-learning. The multicultural person, like Robert J. Lifton's concept of "protean man" (1961), is e'er recreating his or her identity. He or she moves through one experience of self to some other, incorporating hither, discarding there, responding dynamically and situationally. This style of self-procedure, suggests Lifton, "is characterized by an interminable serial of experiments and explorations, some shallow, some profound, each of which can readily be abandoned in favor of still new, psychological quests." The multicultural person is always in flux, the configuration of loyalties and identifications changing, the overall image of self perpetually being reformulated through experience and contact with the world. Stated differently, life is an ongoing process of psychic death and rebirth.
Third, the multicultural person maintains indefinite boundaries of the self. The parameters of identity are neither stock-still nor anticipated, being responsive, instead, to both temporary course and openness to modify. Multicultural people are capable of major shifts in their frame of reference and embody the ability to disavow a permanent character and change in socio-psychological style. The multicultural person, in the words of Peter Berger (1973) is a "homeless heed," a status which, though assuasive great flexibility, also allows for nothing permanent and unchanging to develop. This homelessness is at the heart of his motivational needs. He is, suggests Lifton, "starved for ideas and feelings that give coherence to his world", that give structure and course to the search for the universal and absolute, that give definition to the perpetual quest. The multicultural person, like great philosophers in whatsoever age, tin can never accept totally the demands of any ane culture nor are they free from the conditioning of their culture. Their psychocultural manner must always be relational and in movement, able to wait at their ain original culture from an outsider'due south perspective. This tension gives rising to a dynamic, passionate, and critical posture in the face of totalistic ideologies, systems, and movements.
Like the civilization-bound person, the multicultural person bears within him or herself a simultaneous epitome of societies, nature, personality, and culture. Yet in dissimilarity to the structure of cultural identity, the multicultural individual is perpetually redefining his or her mazeway. No culture is capable of imprinting or ingraining the identity of a multicultural person indelibly: still, the multicultural person must rely heavily on civilization to maintain his or her own relativity. Similar man beings in any period of time, he or she is driven by psychobiological, psychosocial, and psychophilosophical motivations; yet the configuration of these drives is perpetually in flux and situational. The maturational hierarchy, implicit in the central prototype of cultural identity, is less structured and cohesive in the multicultural identity. For that reason, needs, drives, motivations, and expectations are constantly beingness aligned and realigned to fit the context he or she is in.
The flexibility of the multicultural personality allows great variation in adaptability and adjustment. Adjustment and adaptation, however, must always be dependent on some constant, on something stable and unchanging in the fabric of life. We tin can aspect to the multicultural person three fundamental postulates that are incorporated and reflected in thinking and behavior. Such postulates are key to success in cross-cultural accommodation.
one. Every culture or system has its ain internal coherence, integrity, and logic. Every civilisation is an intertwined system of values and attitudes, beliefs and norms that give meaning and significance to both individual and commonage identity.
2. No one civilization is inherently amend or worse than some other. All cultural systems are equally valid as variations on the homo feel.
iii. All persons are, to some extent, culturally bound. Every culture provides the individual with some sense of identity, some regulation of behavior, and some sense of personal place in the scheme of things.
The multicultural person embodies these propositions and lives them on a daily basis and not just in cross-cultural situations. They are fundamentally a part of his or her interior prototype of the earth and self.
What is uniquely new about this emerging man being is a psychocultural style of self-process that transcends the structured image a given culture may impress upon the individual in his or her youth. The navigating image at the cadre of the multicultural personality is premised on an assumption of many cultural realities. The multicultural person, therefore, is not only the one who is sensitive to many unlike cultures. Rather, this person is e'er in the procedure of becoming a part of and autonomously from a given cultural context. He or she is a determinative being, resilient, changing, and evolutionary. At that place is no permanent cultural "character" merely neither is he or she free from the influences of culture. In the shifts and movements of his or her identity process, the multicultural person is continually recreating the symbol of self. The concept of a multicultural identity is illustrated and differentiated from the schema of cultural identity in figure 2.
The indefinite boundaries and the constantly realigning relationships that are generated by the psychobiological, psychosocial, and psychophilosophical motivations brand possible sophisticated and complex responses on the part of the individual to cultural and subcultural systems. Moreover, this psychocultural flexibility necessitates sequential changes in identity. Intentionally or accidentally, multicultural persons undergo shifts in their full psychocultural posture; their religion, personality, behavior, occupation, nationality, outlook, political persuasion, and values may, in part or completely, reformulate in the confront of new feel. "It is condign increasingly possible," wrote Michael Novak (1970), "for men to live through several profound conversions, calling along in themselves significantly different personalities...." The human relationship of multicultural persons to cultural systems is fragile and tenuous. " A man's cultural and social milieu," says Novak, "weather condition his personality, values, and deportment; yet the same man is able, within limits, to choose the milieus whose conditioning will affect him."
Who, then, is the multicultural person? Iv different variations of the multicultural identity process can be seen in the following case studies. While two of these individuals have been interviewed extensively past the author,3 the other two were prominent literary and intellectual figures in the 1970s. Each of these persons, in their own unique way, represents some of the essential characteristics of the multicultural person in a brilliant and dramatic manner.
1. C.K. is a talented musician, an first-class student, a securely spiritual disciple of an Indian mystic, and at in one case, a teacher and a friend to a number of other students. Though outgoing, humorous, and clear he is besides a private, almost placidity person who appears to exert a high caste of control over his life. Coming from a large family unit in which his father, an engineer, spent a good bargain of time aboard, C.1000. had an early opportunity to live and report in a foreign civilization. Following high school C.K. spent his college years in the Eye E where he purposely stayed away from other Americans in order to facilitate both contacts with the local people and language learning. His first years in the Center East were significant: "It was at this point that I began to see where I grew upwardly and not just know that I had been raised in America." In high school, C.K. had been intensely interested in mathematics and physics, his college career, however, brought about a shift. Increasingly, he constitute himself interested in music, an interest that would later carry him East both academically and spiritually. It was during his college years that C.K. also became aware of American policy abroad; though never entirely a political activist, C.K. was outspoken and critical of American strange policy and critical of the Vietnam war. After completing his B.A., C.Thou. enrolled in graduate studies in ethno- musicology, concentrating his piece of work on the Indian flute. With his wife he spent a year and a half in Bharat studying under an Indian teacher. His Indian experiences were important. Living and studying in a traditional setting, C.Chiliad. became progressively more than involved with the philosophic traditions of the country and eventually met a well-known Indian mystic. His encounters with the meditations of this instructor influenced him profoundly. Afterwards months of study, meditation, and living with this religious leader and his other disciples, C.K. himself became a disciple. The dissolution of his marriage which he calls "an amicable and agreeable parting" came at roughly the aforementioned fourth dimension. After returning to the United States to continue his graduate studies in music, C.Thou., still very much a disciple of his teacher, has continued to both practice and teach meditation. C.K. is warm and clear in discussion. He describes life as a series of peaks and valleys, what he calls the "mountain climbing" model of existence. "Life is a serial of mountains in which you must go downwardly one mountain in lodge to go up yet another. Each rise and descent is difficult but one must exist able to feel both the top and the bottom if one is to grow." C.K. is an exceptional person. His friends to whom he teaches meditation come up from a variety of disciplines and countries, including some from India and Nippon. In his mean solar day-to-day experiences, C.K. seems to react situationally. In his own words, he makes every endeavor to "exist in the here and now," to chronicle to people individually, and to live as simple and uncomplicated an existence as possible. Though he rejects much talk nigh mysticism, C.K. lives an ascetic and "feeling" style of life in which he aspires to bring himself into contact with the larger rhythms of nature and of the universe.
2. Y.N. is Japanese, an expatriate residing in Hawaii, and a tranquility intelligent individual. Though he initially is shy with strangers, Y.Due north. likes very much to play host for his friends. In conversation he will demonstrate techniques of jujitsu, in which he holds a high-ranking belt, and talk nearly the incidents that he experienced in his travels throughout Asia and America. Brought upwardly in a middle-class, though relatively traditional home, Y.Due north. finished high school and taught ikebana, the fine art of flower organisation. In loftier school, Y.North. became a member of a splinter faction of the Zengakuren, the militant student movement in Japan, and participated actively in numerous demonstrations and educatee revolts. He describes this fourth dimension in his life every bit "both a loftier and low for myself." Though his commitment to the radical movement was deep, he felt strongly the urge to alive contemplatively and reflectively every bit his various masteries had taught him to practise. In the tension that surrounded the late 1960s in Nippon, and amongst conflicts with his father who was opposed to his radical leanings, he "escaped" to America where he taught ikebana and other artful and martial arts and where he has every intention of remaining until he "finds another place to alive." Having detached himself from both the aesthetic arts and radical political causes, Y.North. is today employed in a hotel as a means of supporting himself through school. Since coming to the Usa, Y.N. has undergone, in his words, a "transformation." He is completely different and realizes that he is no longer able to return to Nippon to get reconciled with his family and culture. Nor is he totally at domicile in the U.Due south. Instead, he sees the U.Southward. as a temporary identify for himself and considers the globe to be his home. At one point, several years after being in the U.S., Y.Northward. returned to Japan, merely his anxieties rapidly cascaded into a nervous breakdown. Returning to America, he underwent intensive psychotherapy and again resumed his studies, and with an undergraduate degree in history, is considering moving to Commonwealth of australia. Though unsure of his future, he hopes to utilize his studies of history in didactics and writing and seems confident that his inner struggles have prepared him for further changes which he sees equally inevitable.
3. Carlos Castaneda (1956, 1971, 1972),4 familiar through his writings most don Juan, the Yaqui Indian sorcerer, is an anthropologist by training, a Brazilian by birth, and an elusive, intensely private individual. He is known solely through his books and the articles well-nigh him that accept appeared in pop literature. Castaneda spent most of his life in Argentina and came to the United States to practise graduate work in anthropology. Interested in the cultural uses of psychotropic drugs, he began field work with don Juan Mateus, a Yaqui Indian reputed to exist a medicine human being of nifty power. Afterwards a yr of studying with don Juan, Castaneda entered an apprenticeship nether the sorcerer and spent the next twelve years working, living, and studying under the old man. His start books documented his experiences with mescaline, peyote, and jimson weed and his progressively deeper involvement with the cultural context in which such drugs are used. In attempting to understand their use, Castaneda had to struggle with a "non-ordinary reality." His writings, taken in series, document his struggles to empathize some other way of life, his resistances, his failures, and his occasional successes. A trained Western scientist, Castaneda's apprenticeship led him deeper and deeper into the world of the "brujo," a reality which is equally much comprised of phantoms and spirits as it is rattlesnakes and cactus. Progressively more than jolted by the boggling things he encountered in the earth of don Juan, Castaneda documented his experiences, which read similar the dream logs of Jungian psychologists. Throughout his twelve years of apprenticeship, don Juan has progressively brought Castaneda deeper into the "becoming of a man of power and noesis." At least ane of the ongoing lessons of don Juan is that of responsibleness, to personally be answerable for every movement and idea, every beliefs and action. To pick the leaves of a found, to disturb pebbles in the desert, or to shiver in the cold are all ultimate acts of the person who has command of him or herself. Aught is take a chance; yet null can be explained logically or rationally. Studying, writing, and existing on the far fringe of academic respectability, Castaneda seems comfortable in his relationships to several different cultures.
4. Norman O. Chocolate-brown, born in Mexico of American parents, educated in both England and the U.S., at in one case a researcher for the Office of Strategic Services (forerunner of the CIA), was a professor of comparative literature and a prominent left-wing thinker. Before his death, Brown was a fiercely intentional, highly provocative author whose major contributions have been in fields where he had limited academic training. At one time an obscure teacher of literature, Brownish became immersed in a penetrating report of Freud in the tardily 1950s. Out of his encounters with the psychoanalytic school of psychology, Brown wrote his outset volume, Life against Death (1959), which sought null less than a total overhaul of psychological, social, economic, and political thinking. Using his thoughts on the Freudian concept of repression as a deviation signal, Brownish attempted to formulate a social theory that removed all barriers to human liberation. Having jumped freely into the domain of psychologists, sociologists, and political scientists, Chocolate-brown saw promise in madness and in the Dionysian model. His apocalyptic vision encompassed, in his own words, "a shaking of the foundations" which bind humans to repetitious, self-destructive behavior. Brown was a visionary in the schoolhouse of Nietzsche and, like Nietzsche, institute liberation in the ultimate destruction of all boundaries. Brown and his writings cannot be encapsulated in a discipline. He overlapped, expanded, and outburst areas of study and purposely sought to shock his intellectual peers with thinking that was often bizarre, usually outrageous, and ever rigorous. He drew from the sources of metaphor: myths, dreams, religion, symbols, and the undercurrents of the unconscious; in drawing together sources from philosophy, theology, psychology, and history, he wove together a theoretical perspective that was both analytic and polemic. Brown was a spokesman for liberation, his enemy, the "politics of sin, cynicism, and despair"; his goal was the ultimate unification of humans and nature. Far from being a gadfly, Brown was accepted every bit a deep and penetrating thinker whose writings thrust him into the office of both counterculture hero and enemy of the academic establishment. More than anything else, all the same, Brown jumped across disciplines, theories, and traditions in an effort to free the homo heed from its blinders. His ultimate vision came to residuum in poetry and in the sublime, if unchallengeable, processes of dialectical confrontation with the barriers of his fourth dimension.
Each of these individuals, C.Chiliad., Y.N., Castaneda, and the late Norman O. Dark-brown illustrate some of the cardinal elements of the multicultural identity. Each of these individuals underwent shifts in identity -- and in some cases quite radical breaks with their previous "selves." C.K. and Castaneda, for example, followed courses that involved a search for heightened personal consciousness. Y.Northward. and Brown, on the other paw, pursued a series of identity changes that carried them into and through a radical political posture. Just in all 4 of these individuals it is possible to see the fracture points in which the constellation of values, attitudes, worldview, and outlook that we call identity changed. Each of these individuals embraced, only to permit go, one cultural frame of reference in favor of some other.
Neither C.Thousand., Y.N., Castaneda, or Chocolate-brown should be viewed equally "usual" persons. All of them perched themselves precariously close to the boundaries of the organisation. In the case of Y.N., this involved self-exile from his native state; for Chocolate-brown, information technology meant a departure from the perimeters of his training and expertise; for C.Chiliad., the experience of self meant embracing a religious order that is antipodal to the Western tradition; and for Castaneda, it involved an disturbing indoctrination into an lodge of experience that carried him far from the careful, methodical schooling of anthropology. Each of these persons likewise demonstrates some of the attributes of an outsider, persons who are intentionally or accidentally dislocated from one frame of reference to some other, from 1 environment of experience to a different i. As different as their personalities, orientations, political values, and personal objectives were, they shared a similar and fluid procedure of identity. Y.N. became severely disturbed by the demands placed on him through conflicts in loyalty. Brown glorified the infantile ego and took refuge in an intellectual process that necessitated the peachy of all boundaries without regard for the functions such boundaries may perform. Castaneda removed himself totally from the public view, while C.K. submitted himself to dogmatic totalism.
STRESSES AND TENSIONS
The unprecedented dynamism of the multicultural person makes information technology possible to live many dissimilar lives, in sequence or simultaneously. But such psychocultural pliability gives rising to tensions and stresses unique to the weather condition which let such dynamism in the commencement identify. The multicultural individual, by virtue of indefinite boundaries, experiences life intensely and in telescoped forms. He or she is thus subject to stresses and strains that are every bit unique. At to the lowest degree five of these stresses carry mentioning.
Get-go, the multicultural person is vulnerable. In maintaining no clear purlieus and form, he or she is susceptible to disruptive the profound and the insignificant, the of import and the unimportant, the visionary and the reactionary. "Boundaries can be viewed," suggests Lifton (1967), "as neither permanent nor past definition false, but rather equally essential.... We require images of limit and restraint, if only to help united states grasp what nosotros are transcending. We need distinctions between our biological science and our history, all the more and so as we seek to bring these together in a sense of ourselves...." Without some class of purlieus, experience itself has no shape or contour, no significant and importance; where the private maintains no critical edge to his existence everything can get confusion. Feel, in gild to be a particular experience, must have place amongst some essential polarity in which there is tension between two opposing forces. Where at that place is no sense of evil, there tin be no sense of skillful; where naught is profane, nothing tin can exist sacred. Boundaries, withal indefinite, requite shape and meaning to the feel of experience; they allow us to differentiate, define, and determine who we are in relation to someone or something else.
Second, the multicultural person can easily get multiphrenic, that is, to use Erikson's terminology, a "diffused identity." Where the configuration of loyalties and identifications is constantly in flux and where boundaries are never secure, the multicultural person is open to any and all kinds of stimuli. In the face of messages which are confusing, contradictory, or overwhelming , the individual is thrown back on his or her own subjectivity with to integrate and sort out what is indiscriminately taken in. Where incapable of doing this, the multicultural person is pulled and pushed by the winds of communication, a victim of what everyone else claims he or she is or should exist. It is the task of every social and cultural group to define messages, images, and symbols into constructs that the individual tin can interpret into his or her own existence. Simply where the messages and stimuli of all groups are given equal importance and validity, the private can hands be overwhelmed past the demands of anybody else.
Third, the multicultural person tin easily suffer from a loss of the sense of authenticity, that is, by virtue of beingness psychoculturally adaptive, the person can potentially be reduced to a variety of roles that comport little or no relationship to i another. The person tin lose the sense of congruence and integrity that is implicit in the definition of identity itself. Roles, suggest psychologists, are constellations of behaviors that are expected of an individual considering of one's place in item social or cultural arrangements. Behind roles are the deeper threads of continuity, the processes of affect, perception, cognition, and value that make a whole of the parts. The multicultural personality tin can hands disintegrate into fragmented personalities that are unable to experience life along any dimension other than that which is institutionalized and routinized by family, friends, and order.
Quaternary, and related to this, is the risk of being a gadfly and a dilettante. The multicultural person tin can very easily movement from identity experience to identity experience without committing values to existent-life situations. The energy and enthusiasm brought to deport on new situations can easily disintegrate into superficial fads and fancies in which the multicultural person elementary avoids deeper responsibilities and involvements. The person becomes plastic. Flexibility disguises a self process in which real human issues are avoided or given simply superficial importance. Peculiarly in societies, where youth is vulnerable to the made fads of contemporary globe culture, the multicultural identity tin can give style to a dilettantism in which the individual flows, unimpaired, uncommitted, and unaffected, through social, political, and economic manipulations of elites.
5th, and finally, the multicultural person may take ultimate psychological and philosophical refuge in an attitude of existential applesauce, mocking the patterns and lifestyles of others who are different, reacting, at best in a detached and aristocratic mode, and at worst as a nihilist who sees negation equally a conservancy. Where the breakdown of boundaries creates a gulf that separates the individual from meaningful relationships with others, the individual may hide behind cynicisms that harbor apathy and insecurity. In such a condition goose egg inside and nothing exterior of the individual is of serious effect; the individual, in such a position, must ultimately scorn that which cannot be understood and incorporated into his or her own being.
These stresses and strains should not be confused with the tensions and anxieties that are encountered in the process of cross-cultural adjustment. Culture daze is a more than superficial constellation of problems that result from the misreading of commonly perceived and understood signs of social interaction. Nor is the delineation of these tensions meant to propose that the multicultural person must necessarily harbor these various difficulties. The multicultural style of identity is premised on a fluid, dynamic motion of the self, an ability to move in and out of contexts, and an ability to maintain some inner coherence through varieties of situations. As for psychocultural style, the multicultural individual may just every bit easily be a bully artist or a neurotic, each of whom are equally as susceptible to the fundamental forces of our time. Whatever list of multicultural individuals must automatically include individuals who take achieved a loftier degree of accomplishment, i.due east., writers, musicians, diplomats, etc., as well as those women and men whose lives have, for one reason or another, been fractured by the circumstances they failed to negotiate. The artist and the neurotic lie close together in each of us suggests Rollo May (1969). "The neurotic," he writes, "and the artist--since both live out the unconscious of the race--reveal to the states what is going to emerge endemically in the club subsequently on...the neurotic is the 'artiste Manque,' the artist who cannot transmute his conflicts into art."
The identity process of the multicultural private represents a new kind of person unfettered by the constricting limitations of culture every bit a total entity. Still, similar women and men in any historic period, the multicultural person must negotiate the difficulties of cantankerous-cultural contact. The literature of cross-cultural psychology is rich with examples of the kinds of bug encountered when people are intensely exposed to other cultures. Integration and assimilation, for instance, stand for two dissimilar responses to a dominant culture, integration suggesting the retention of subcultural differences, and absorption implying absorption into a larger cultural system. The relationship betwixt assimilation, integration, and identification, co-ordinate to Sommerlad and Drupe (1973), suggests that if people identify with their own grouping, they will agree favorable attitudes towards integration. On the other mitt, if they identify with the host society, they should favor assimilation. Related to this are the diverse negative attitudes, psychosomatic stresses, and deviant behaviors that are expressed by individuals in psychologically risky situations. "Opposite to predictions stemming from the theory of Marginal Man," writes J.Due west.Berry (1970), "information technology tends to be those persons more than traditionally oriented who suffer the nearly psychological marginality, rather than those who wish to movement on and cannot." The multicultural human or woman is, in many ways, a stranger. The degree to which he or she can continually modify the frame of reference and become aware of the structures and functions of a group, while at the aforementioned fourth dimension maintaining a clear understanding of personal, ethnic, and cultural identifications, may very well be the degree to which the multicultural person can truly part successfully between cultures.
Although it is hard to pinpoint the weather condition under which cultural identities volition evolve into multicultural identities, such changes in psychocultural style are most likely to occur where the foundations of collective cultural identity have been shaken. "Communities that have been exposed too long to exceptional stresses from ecological or economical hardships," writes J.W.Cawte (1973), "or from natural or man-made disasters, are apt to have a high proportion of their members subject to mental disorders." Cawte'due south studies of the Aboriginal societies of Australia and Turnbull's studies of the Ik in Africa (1972) document how major threats to collective cultural identity produce social and psychological breakdown in individuals. Yet, potentially, multicultural attitudes and values may develop where cultural interchange takes place between cultures that are not totally disparate or where the rate of change is evolutionary rather than immediate. The reorganization of a civilisation, suggests J.L.G. Dawson (1969), "results in the formation of in-between attitudes" which Dawson considers "to be more than appropriate for the satisfactory adjustment of individuals in transitional situations." The multicultural style, then, may exist born and initially expressed in whatever club or civilization that is faced with new exposures to other ways of life.
Conceptualization of a multicultural identity fashion in terms of personality types, behavior patterns, traits, and cultural groundwork is at best impressionistic and anecdotal. Yet, the investigations of cross-cultural psychologists and anthropologists give increasing acceptance to the thought of a multicultural personality who is shaped and contoured by the stresses and strains which event from cultural interweaving at both the macro-and microcultural levels. Seemingly, a multicultural style is able to evolve when the individual is capable of negotiating the conflicts and tensions inherent in cantankerous-cultural contacts. The multicultural person, then, may very well correspond an affirmation of individual identity at a higher level of social, psychological, and cultural integration.
Just as the cultures of the world, if they are to merit survival amidst the onslaught of Western technologies, must be responsive to both tradition and modify, and then as well must the individual identity be psychoculturally adaptive to the encounters of an imploding world. There is every reason to think that such human beings are emerging. The multicultural person, embodying sequential identities, is open to the continuous wheel of birth and decease equally it takes place inside the framework of his or her psyche. The lifestyle of the multicultural person is a continual process of dissolution and reformation of identity; withal implicit in such a procedure is growth. Psychological movements into new dimensions of perception and feel tend very often to produce forms of personality disintegration, and disintegration, suggests Kazimierez Dabrowski (1964), "is the basis for developmental thrusts upward, the creation of new evolutionary dynamics, and the movement of personality to a higher level...." The seeds of each new identity of the multicultural person lie within the disintegration of previous identities. "When the human being," writes Erikson (1964), "because of adventitious or developmental shifts, loses an essential wholeness, he restructures himself and the world by taking recourse to what we may telephone call 'totalism'." Such totalism, above and across being a machinery of coping and adjustment, is a function of the growth of a new kind of wholeness at a higher level of integration.
CONCLUSIONS AND SUMMARY
This paper does not suggest that the multicultural person is at present the predominant character style of our time. Nor is information technology meant to suggest that multicultural persons, by virtue of their uninhibited way of relating to other cultures, are in whatsoever style "meliorate" than those who are mono-or bicultural. Rather, this paper argues that multicultural persons are non just individuals who are sensitive to other cultures or knowledgeable nearly international diplomacy, but instead can exist defined by a psychocultural pattern of identity that differs radically from the relatively stable forms of self-process establish in the usual cultural identity pattern. This paper argues that both cultural and multicultural identity processes tin can exist conceptualized by the constellation of biological, social, and philosophical motivations involved and by the relative degrees of rigidity maintained in personal boundaries and that such conceptualization lays the basis for comparative inquiry.
Two concluding points might be noted near the multicultural personality. Commencement, the multicultural person embodies attributes and characteristics that prepare him or her to serve as a facilitator and catalyst for contacts between cultures. The variations and flexibility of this identity style allows that person to relate to a variety of contexts and environments without being totally encapsulated by or totally alienated from any given culture. Every bit Stephen Bochner (1973) suggests, a major problem in attempting to avoid the loss of cultures in Asia and the Pacific "is the lack of sufficient people who tin act as links between diverse cultural systems." These "mediating" individuals contain the essential characteristics of the multicultural person. "18-carat multicultural individuals are very rare," he writes, "which is unfortunate considering it is these people who are uniquely equipped to mediate the cultures of the globe." The multicultural person, then, embodies a pattern of self-process that potentially allows him or her to help others negotiate the cultural realities of a different system. With a self-process that is adaptational, the multicultural individual is in a unique position to sympathise, facilitate, and enquiry the psychocultural dynamics of other systems.
2d, multiculturalism is an increasingly significant psychological and cultural phenomenon, plenty so equally to merit further conceptualization and research. Information technology is neither piece of cake nor necessarily useful to reconcile the approaches of psychology and anthropology; nor is in that location any guarantee that interdisciplinary approaches bring us closer to an intelligent understanding of human being beings equally exist in relation to their civilization.Yet, the multicultural person may show to be a significant enough trouble in agreement the process of culture learning (and civilisation unlearning) to force an integrated approach to studies of the individual and the group. "Psychologists," write Brislin, Lonner, and Thorndike (1973), "take the goal of incorporating the behavior of many cultures into one theory (etic approach), just they must as well understand the behavior inside each culture (emic arroyo)." Empirical research based on strategies that tin can accurately observe, measure out, and test behavior and that incorporate the "emic versus etic" stardom will exist a natural adjacent step. Such studies may very well exist a springboard into the more central dynamics of cross-cultural relationships.
Nosotros alive in a transitional period of history, a time that of necessity demands parallel forms of psychocultural self-procedure. That a truthful international community of nations is coming into existence is still a debatable issue, just that individuals with a self-consciousness that is larger than the mental territory of their civilisation are emerging is no longer arguable. The psychocultural pattern of identity that is called for to permit such cocky-consciousness, adaptability, and variation opens such individuals to both benefits and pathologies. The interlinking of cultures and persons in the twentieth century is not e'er a pleasant process; modernization and economic development have taken heavy psychological tolls in both developed and Tertiary-World countries. The changes brought on in our fourth dimension have invoked revitalized needs for the preservation of collective, cultural identities. Nevertheless, along with the disorientation and alienation which have characterized much of this century comes a new possibility in the way humans conceive of their private identities and the identity of the human species. No 1 has better stated this possibility than Harold Taylor (1969), himself an first-class example of the multicultural person:
"There is a new kind of man in the globe, and there are more than of that kind than is usually recognized. He is a national denizen with international intuitions, conscious of the age that is past and aware of the one now in existence, aware of the radical difference between the two, willing to accept the lack of precedents, willing to work on the bug of the hereafter as a labor of dearest, unrewarded by governments, academies, prizes, and position. He forms part of an invisible world community of poets, writes, dancers, scientists, teachers, lawyers, scholars, philosophers, students, citizens who see the globe whole and experience at i with all its parts."
NOTES
1. This article originally appeared in 1977 in Civilisation Learning: Concepts, Applications, and Inquiry, edited by Richard W. Brislin and published past the East-West Center, The Academy Press of Hawaii. It has later on been reprinted in various other texts on intercultural advice simply revised and updated specifically for this publication.
two. A technical reference to the controversial literature examining the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis can exist found in "Psycholinguistics" by K. Miller and D. McNeill in Volume iii of the Handbook of Social Psychology, edited by G. Lindzey and E. Aronson (Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1968).
three. The examples of both C.K. and Y.Northward. are condensed from longer example studies done by the author equally role of his inquiry on identity changes that issue from cantankerous-cultural experiences. The full case studies are included in his Ph.D. thesis entitled "The Boundary Feel." (Union for Experimenting Colleges and Universities, 1974.
4. Since the publication of his immensely popular books, Carlos Castaneda has been accused of working a hoax on the public. This commodity makes no judgements about the veracity of don Juan's beingness or the experiences reported by Castaneda. True or untrue, Castaneda's experiences offer useful insights into the dynamics of the multicultural personality.
REFERENCES
Berger, P., and Berger, B. The Homeless Listen. New York: Random Business firm, 1973.
Berry, J.West. "Marginality, Stress and Ethnic Identification." Periodical of Cross Cultural Psychology, ane 1970 :239-52.
Bochner, Southward. "The Mediating Human and Cultural Multifariousness." Topics in Culture Learning Series, Vol. 1, 1973, 23-37.
Boulding, K. The Image. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1956.
Brislin, R., Lonner, W., and Thorndike, R. Cross-Cultural Inquiry Methods. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1973.
Brown, Due north. Life Against Expiry. Middleton, CT.: Wesleyan Academy Press, 1959.
Campbell, A., Gurin, G., and Miller, W.East. The Voter Decides. Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson, 1954.
Castaneda, C. Journey to Ixtlan. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1972.
----------------, A Divide Reality. New York: Pocket Books, 1971.
----------------, The Teachings of Don Juan. New York: Ballantine, 1969.
Cawte, J.East. "A Sick Club." In , The Psychology of Aboriginal Australians edited by 1000.E. Kearney, P.R. de Lacey, and One thousand.R. Davidson, Sydney: John Wiley & Sons Australasia Pty Ltd., 1973, 365-79.
Cofer, C., and Appley, M. Motivation: Theory and Research. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1964.
Dabrowski, K. Positive Disintegration. Boston: Little, Brown, 1964.
Dawson, J.Fifty.Yard. "Mental attitude Alter and Conflict." Australian Journal of Psychology, 21, 1969, :101-116.
Erikson, E. Insight and Responsibility. New York: W.W. Norton, 1964.
Erikson, East. "The Problem of Ego Identity." Psychological Issues, i, no. i, 1959, :101-164.
Garrison, One thousand. "Worldminded Attitudes of College Students in a Southern University." Journal of Social Psychology, 54 1961, 147-53.
Kluckhohn, C. and Leighton, D. "The Language of the Navajo Indians" In Civilisation Shock edited by P. Bock, New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1970, 29-49.
Lasswell, H. The Time to come of World Communication: Quality and Manner of Life. Honolulu: East-West Center Communication Constitute, 1972. Lifton, R. Boundaries. New York: Vintage Books, 1967.
--------- History and Human being Survival. New York: Vintage Books, 1961.
Lutzker, D. "Internationalism as a Predictor of Cooperative Behavior," Periodical of Conflict Resolution, 4, no. 4, 1960, :426-430.
Maslow, A. Toward a Psychology of Beingness. Princeton: Van Nostrand Company, 1962.
May, R. Love and Will. New York: Dell Publishing, 1969.
Murdock, 1000. "Universals of Culture." In Readings in Anthropology edited past J. Jennings and E.A. Hoebel, New York: McGraw-Hill 1955, thirteen-14.
Novak, M. The Experience of Nothingness. New York: Harper & Row, 1970.
Paul, S. "Worldminded Attitudes of Punjab Academy Students," Periodical of Social Psychology 69 1969, :33-37.
Sampson, D and Smith, H. "A Scale To Measure World-Minded Attitudes," Journal of Social Psychology, 45 1957 :99-106.
Vocaliser, M. "Culture: A Perceptual Approach." In Readings in Intercultural Communication edited by D. Hoopes. Regional Council for International Education, Pittsburgh: 1971, 6-20.
Sommerlad, Eastward., and Berry J.W. "The Role of Ethnic Identification." In The Psychology of Ancient Australians. edited by G.E. Kearney, P.R. de Lacey, and G.R. Davidson, Sydney: John Wiley & Sons Australasia Pty Ltd., 1973, 236-43.
Taylor, H. "Toward a World University," Saturday Review, 24 (1969) :52.
Tillich, P. The Future of Religions. New York: Harper & Row, 1966.
Turnbull, C. The Mountain People. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1972.
Wallace, A. Revitalization Movements: Some Theoretical Considerations for Their Comparative Written report," American Anthropologist 58 1956, :264-281.
Walsh, J. Intercultural Pedagogy in the Communication of Man. Honolulu: The University of Hawaii Press, 1973.
Whorf, B. In Linguistic communication, Idea, and Reality edited by J. B. Carroll. Cambridge: Engineering Printing of MIT.
Biography
Peter Adler directs ACCORD3.0, a group of independent consultants specializing in foresight, fact-finding and conseneus edifice. He is the former President and CEO of The Keystone Eye and has held executive positions with the Hawaii Supreme Court, the Hawaii Justice Foundation, and Neighborhood Justice Centre of Honolulu. Peter can also be reached at 808-888-0215 (landline). Peter is likewise the author of Centre of the Storm Leadership.
Source: https://mediate.com/articles/adler3.cfm
0 Response to "Families in Global and Multicultural Perspective. Second Edition"
Post a Comment