Page 32 [32]
ELIZABETH TROTT
conception of peaceful co-existence has been eroded. If multiculturalism is
based on commitments to eguality and rights for all cultures, we still need to be
sure that all cultures recognize the words ‘equality’ and ‘equal rights’ as relevant
to their vocabularies. Not all cultures do. Equality could apply to men ina culture
where women do not have the same status as individuals but are viewed more
as part of a collective self. By assuming that equality has a clear meaning, such
as being treated in the same way before the law, we may be interfering with a
culture’s right to freely express its different interpretations of equality.** Perhaps
the greatest hurdle for multicultural policy will be the multiple meanings
generated by selves and others, or individuals and communities.
ParT 4: TOWARDS A CONCLUSION
Reflection on Being Canadian
This paper began with a commitment to idealist metaphysical theory as a
source of multiple meanings that can be associated with shared recognitions
of events. The proposed context of analysis was the dialectical logical structure
of ‘self and other’. Once this logical ground of experience is transformed into
particular dialectical relations of different cultures, differences in conceptual
sources of meanings can be detected. Examples of different interpretations for
fundamental concepts assumed to be self- evident were given (e.g. equality)
and the difficulty of establishing agreement between cultures became evident.
Philosophers played a major role in working out the dialectical structure
of Canada, a country of multiple cultures, but with a sense of unity."
A challenge to the idea of Canada as a unity was the declaration that Canada
is a multicultural country. Four different responses were examined, all of
which together revealed weaknesses in the concept of a country’s identity as
multicultural.
The dialectic of particulars and a conceivable whole requires a synthesis
that can support disparate cultural meanings and sustain the ‘other’ — the
idea of Canada.
Even the concept of law has multiple meanings throughout the world. See Adda B. Bozeman,
The Future of Law in a Multicultural World, Princeton, Princeton University, 1971. “...
Cultures are different because they are associated with different modes of thought. In fact,
it even appears that the very word ‘thinking’ is likely to vary from one cultural tradition to
the next.” 14. Bozeman urges “a comparison of the different tables of enduring culturally
preferred values, words and meanings and then to the formulation of an internationally
shared vocabulary capable of assuring clarity in discourse.” 33.
John Watson was the example of such efforts.
* 30°