Document Type : Review Paper
Authors
1
Assistant Professor of Culture and Communication, Department of Sociology, Faculty of Humanities, Shahed University, Tehran, Iran
2
Adjunct Professor, Department of Social Studies, School of Humanities, Jamiat-ul-Mustafa, Qom, Iran
Abstract
The foundation of modern sciences on absolute and fundamental philosophies, or in other words, the construction of supplementary philosophies, represents an approach that the scientific community in the West has pursued in recent decades. This pursuit is such that it attributes part of its scientific superiority and dominance to the extension of those absolute philosophies into new sciences. Among those who have successfully engaged with this extension, emphasizing the field of sociology, is Peter Winch, who has managed to philosophically enrich this discipline. The main question of this research is: What are Peter Winch's epistemological foundations in intercultural communication? The method employed in this study is qualitative, with an interpretive approach and an analytical-critical perspective. According to Winch, since rules are inherently social, understanding the actions of others and various cultures requires the comprehension of governing rules. He also asserts that there is no meta-language or meta-rule encompassing all. Winch views rationality standards as arising from diverse life forms and social contexts, thus considering rationality standards to be multiple and non-comparable. He argues that each culture possesses its own specific rational evaluation criteria, where deviation from these rules undermines rationality. In his view, standards and rules do not qualify as criteria until they are elevated to a social level. Essentially, Winch emphasizes social rules while denying private language and rejecting transcultural rationality. He believes that to understand human actions and diverse cultures, one must recognize the governing social rules. He contends that there is no overarching meta-language or meta-rule that encompasses all rules, and that rationality standards depend on varied life forms and social contexts. This implies that rationality cannot be uniformly assessed across different cultures; each culture has its unique criteria for rational evaluation. Deviating from these rules can lead to a loss of rationality. Therefore, Winch underscores the importance of social rules and rejects private language and transcultural rationality, asserting that standards and rules are only recognized as such when elevated to a social level.
Keywords
Subjects
