Quantum Cultural Management - Quantenkulturelles Management

Transcultural Management based on the quantum paradigm, neuroscience and consciousness research - Transkulturelles Management auf der Basis des Quantenparadigmas, der Neurowissenschaften und der Bewusstseinsforschung


Wissenschaftliche Studie, 2012

260 Seiten


Leseprobe

Table of Contents/Inhaltsverzeichnis

I Autonomie und Interdependenz in ganzheitlichen Systemen
1. Mehrstufig-komplementäre Holographien als Basis interkultureller Managementerkenntis
- Systemanalyse: offenes und geschlossenes System
- Quantenphysik: Einheitsfeld, Quanteneffekt, Hologramm
- Eschatologie: Integrität der Schöpfung und Schöpfer-zentrierte Teleologie

II Vishua Chaytana – Formulation of a Global Consciousness-Based Global Inter/Transcultural Management Science
1. The completion of the intercultural edifice
2. Design of a scientifically-based diversity-integrative transcultural profiler
2.1 The state of the intercultural art and science: On human relativity in intercultural research
2.2 Enhancing the intercultural art and science: Sources, models and the achievement of supreme cultural intelligence
3. 36 Inter-/Transcultural Management Instruments

III Bilingual English-German Global Intercultural and Transcultural Management Resource

Bibliography

I Autonomie und Interdependenz in ganzheitlichen Systemen

1. Mehrstufig-komplementäre Holographien als Basis interkultureller Managementerkenntis

Der Begriff Holographie bezieht sich zum ersten auf etwas Ganzheitliches, wie es seine altgriechische Etymologie „holos“ nahelegt. Und der zweite Teil des Begriffes, i. e. „graphie“, weist auf eine Formulierung und Kartierung von Strukturen und Prozessen in einem ganzheitlichen System hin. Der Begriff der Holographie bezieht sich also auf eine strukturell-funktionelle Systematisierung ganzheitlicher Systeme im technischen und soziokulturellen, sowie anderen Bereichen. In dieser Erkenntnis ganzheitlicher strukturell-funktionellen Einheiten liegt der Schlüssel zu ihrer Integrität. Und die Erkenntnis und Wahrung der strukturell-funktionellen Systeme in der Einheit gewährleistet, was als weitere Komponente in dem Begriff „holos“ steckt, nämlich das germanische Wort Heil oder das englische Wort „health“. Die Erkenntnis und Wahrung der Integrität ganzheitlich wechselwirkenden Systeme bedingt ihre optimale Permanenz oder ihr Heil.

Im humanmedizinischen Bereich wird diese Systemintegrität Gesundheit genannt, im Bereich des größten Ganzen, das wir uns vorstellen können, dem der Schöpfung und des Menschen insgesamt, kann man sie als Integrität der Schöpfung und des Menschen bezeichnen und der soziokulturelle Bereich ist nicht mehr und nicht weniger als eine fraktale Spiegelung der Integrität des Makrosystems, i. e. der Integrität der Schöpfung und des Menschen im soziokulturellen Subsystem des Makrosystems.

Wo setzt man nun an, wenn unter dem Blickwinkel der holistischen Erkenntnis der Welt Dysfunktionalitäten in einem Systembereich auftreten? Die Kräftefeldertheorie besagt, dass es wirksamer ist, hindernde Faktoren zu beseitigen, als vermeintlich förderliche hinzuzufügen, weil diese ihrerseits kritische Prozesse auslösen und eventuell das Ziel der Reintegration ganzheitlicher Systeme in ihre strukturell-funktionelle Integrität verursachen können. Diese Annahmen setzt die Erkenntnis oder die Analyse des betreffenden Systems voraus, um die hinderlichen Faktoren, die ursächlich für Systemfunktionalitäten sind, zu diagnostizieren, sie zu beseitigen und somit die Systemintegrität wiederherzustellen.

Es genügt also, die Normalität eines Systems, sei es des menschlichen Terrains oder des soziokulturellen Organismus wiederherzustellen, damit die immanente Intelligenz holistischer Systeme in ihrer organisch wechselwirkenden und diese erhaltenden Integrität wieder greifen und den optimalen Fortbestand der ganzheitlicher Systeme sichern kann. Symptomatiken der Dysfunktionalität im menschlichen oder sozialen Organismus sind Rückmeldungen der Systeme über den Status der ihr Leben und ihren Fortbestand bedingenden Integrität.

In der Systemanalyse klammert sich der Systemanalytiker bisweilen an der Integritätsanalyse eines Systembereichs, weil er eventuell davon ausgeht, dass es sich um ein geschlossenes System handelt dessen Dysfunktionalität subsystemintern, unabhängig von dem damit wechselwirkenden Gesamtsystem behoben und bewerkstelligt werden kann. Doch dies ist eine reduktionistische ganzheitliche Systemauffassung, da sie unter dem ganzheitlichen Systemblickwinkel weder das weitere System, noch den Analytiker selbst in die Gleichung miteinbezieht. Indes, die Pioniere der Quantenphysik, wie z. B. Bohr und Heisenberg, haben bereits in den späten zwanziger Jahren des vergangenen Jahrhunderts, in Zusammenhang mit der sogenannten Kollabierung der Wellenfunktion insbesondere auf letzteres hingewiesen.

Die Diagnose ebenso wie die Therapie zur Wiederherstellung der ganzheitlichen Systemintegrität werden somit entsprechend defizitär ausfallen. In einer holistischen Systemauffassung, insbesondere, wenn man sich auf ein Quantenfeld und von einer umfassend wechselwirkenden Interkonnektivität beziehen sollte, ist es also naheliegend, von offenen Systemen auszugehen, die in mehr oder weniger überschaubarer Form vielfältig wechselwirken. Gleich welcher Weltanschauung man anhängt, die Wechselwirkung liegt im Bereich der Plausibilität.

Geht man von einem Hologramm aus, das beinhaltet, dass alles in allem enthalten ist, so kann man von einer Omnipräsenz der Aspekte des Details im Ganzen und jenen des Ganzen in seinen geringsten Details auszugehen. Raum und Zeit und kausale Prozesse in der Zeit werden hier relativiert und in einem Einheitsfeld integriert. Dies würde bedeuten, dass man aufgrund der synchronen Omnipräsenz des ganzheitlichen Systems aufgrund der simultanen Omnipräsenz von allem in allem den Hebel zur Reintegration des ganzen Systems in jedem Systembereich ansetzen kann.

Soziokulturell bedeutet dies ein Empowerment und eine Rechenschaftspflichtigkeit aller Akteure eines Systems für die Wiederherstellung und Wahrung der Integrität eines Systems oder Systembereichs. Es findet eine Weiterentwicklung des Begriffes der Autonomie über Beziehung hin zur tieferen Erkenntnis wechselwirkender Beziehungen in der alles umspannenden Einheit statt, die die Integrität des Systems mit seinen Komponenten im tieferen Sinne bedingt.

Der heutige Verlust der Integrität menschlicher, materieller und soziokultureller Systeme, der ihr Ende bedeuten kann, grassiert heutzutage in vielfältiger Form und scheint laut Analytiker aus Relativierungsprozessen zu resultieren, die die Integrität der diversen Systeme und schließlich auch die Integrität des Menschen und der Schöpfung untergraben. Diese Relativierung manifestiert sich in den ganzheitlichen menschlichen und sozialen Organismen, die dadurch ihre selbstregulierende Intelligenz ganzheitlich wechselwirkender strukturell-funktioneller Intelligenz nicht mehr realisieren können. Krisensignale tauchen in allen Systembereichen auf, wie wir sie heute in den wirtschaftlichen, kulturellen, ökologischen und menschlichen Systembereichen allerorts, vergleichbar mit dem Hologramm, beobachten können.

Da die Relativierung ganzheitlicher Systemprozesse im menschlichen Bewusstsein beginnt, das idio- und ethnozentrisch häufig jene Aspekte eines durch seine Gesamtintegrität charakterisierten Systems in einen toten Winkel rückt, die ihm nicht förderlich scheinen, ist es nötig, das gesamte Bewusstseinsfeld widerherzstellen und zu integrieren. Unter der holographischen Prämisse ist dies ein besonderer Hebel den der Mensch vorteilhaft nutzen kann, um vermittels des Bewusstseins, in dem die von ihm geschaffenen Artefakte präsent sind, zu reintegrieren und somit ihre Viabilität wiederherzustellen. Die Wahl des Bewusstseinsblickwinkels hat eine integrative oder desintegrative Steuerungsfunktion für das interdependente Gesamtsystem.

Ob man von einem omnipräsenten, Zeit-Raum transzendierenden Hologramm der Realität, in dem alles in allem, das Kleine im Großen, ebenso, wie das Große im Kleinen, ausgeht oder von einer Quantenmetapher, bei der das Bewusstsein entsprechend seiner Weite und Tiefe entsprechende Prozesse im beobachteten Feld liest und mitgestaltet, es handelt sich bei beiden Annahmen um Bewusstseinsprozesse; also um ein Primat des Bewusstseins, das das Primat der Integrität der Schöpfung und des Menschen und somit aller Systembereiche des menschlichen bedingt.

Über das Hologramm und den gewiss metaphorischen Quanteneffekt hinaus kann der Integritätsimperativ ganzheitlicher Systeme auch mit zahlreichen zeitlosen, universellen biblischen Metaphern beschreiben werden, wie beispielsweise im Gleichnis des Weinstocks und der Rebzweige, oder dem einen Leib mit den vielen Gliedern. Vielleicht sind die Konzepte einer Planck’schen Matrix, einer Feldes oder Quantenfeldes der Physik, eines Divine Mind oder anderer wundersamer wissenschaftlicher und pseudowissenschaftlicher Neologismen zeitgeist-, kultur- und wissenschaftskulturspezifischer Optiken Nachformulierungen der Bibel in untergeordneter Form, weil sie trotz ihrer ganzheitlichen Anmaßung den allein alles erklärenden Gipfel und Klimax integraler, wahrhaftig uneingeschränkter holographischer Hypothesen, nämlich den Schöpfer ganzheitlicher intelligenter Systeme selbst ausklammern, denn all die Systeme und Systemfragen, mit denen sich die Menschheit herumplagt sind zeitliche, weil veränderliche Systeme. Und hier setzt bereits die erkenntnistheoretische Unterminierung durch Relativierung ein.

Bezieht man jedoch den Schöpfer selbst in die Matrix des menschlichen Geistes und Bewusstseins mit ein, so können alle Systeme kraft dieser die Relativität und Relativierung transzendierenden Meta-Dimension alle menschlichen Systeme über ihre zeitliche Veränderlichkeit in der Überzeitlichkeit verankert und somit vor allen Desintegrationserscheinungen und ihrer Reversibilität feien. Alle modernen Theorien bedürfen also der Weiterentwicklung hin zu einer integral holistischen Optik, die das kosmische Ganze in eine zeitlich-überzeitliche Perspektive rückt. Darin besteht der Quantensprung hin zur wahrhaft holistischen Erkenntnis, die die menschlichen Systembelange, gleich welcher Skalierung und Art, in die kreative Perspektive der Ur-Ursache rückt, deren aktive Erkenntnis, gleich einem Jungbrunnen, alle hinderlichen Faktoren aus den vom Menschen reintegrationsorientiert betrachteten Systemen beseitigt und somit Holos, Heil und Health menschlicher Systeme bewirkt, weil die menschliche Relativität mit ihren Relativierungen per se reintegriert wird.

Abschließend, last but not least, ließen sich vier Stufen holographischer Erkenntnis im allgemeinen und interkultureller Managementerkenntnis, die Teil der Erkenntnis allgemein ist, unterscheiden und kartieren:

Fünf Ebenen holographischer Erkenntnis

1. Systemanalytisch
2. Schöpfungsintegrativ: Die Integrität von Mensch-Kultur-Schöpfung
3. Holographisch im engeren Sine: Die holographische Erkenntnis im Sinne des Hologramms
4. Quantisch: metaphorische quantische Erkenntnis. Quantenkultureller Effekt
5. Teleologisch/eschatologisch: Eine teleologische Schöpfer-zentrierte Holographie

Die korrumpierende Aktivität idio- und ethnozentrisch relativierten Bewusstseins wird bei allen Formen der Erkenntnis, ob im Wege der Spiegelung, Resonanz oder Kokreativität – den verschiedenen Arten der Operationalisierung holographischer Erkenntnis - systemkorrumpierend im Makrosystem mit allen seinen Subsystemen externalisiert und führt zu Dysfunktionalitäten in allen Systemorganismen, deren DNA auf diesem Wege beeinträchtigt wird und die somit ihrerseits als korrumpierte Wirtschafts- ökologische, politische, soziokulturelle und menschliche Systeme erscheinen. Im Sinne der Kräftefeldertheorie können die Dysfunktionalitäten am besten durch die Korrektur der Ur-ursache der Korrumpierung im kokreativen Bereich des individuellen und kollektiven Bewusstseins beseitigt werden. Die eschatologische Erkenntnis ist dabei die älteste und höchste, wie auch die spezifisch für den Menschen zugeschnittene Erkenntnis allumfassender menschlicher, kultureller und Schöpfungsintegrität, die keine Systemvariable ausklammert und somit fehlerfrei und makellos ist, aber keine menschliche Relativierung toleriert.

In den nun folgenden Teilen werden die menschlichen und kulturellen Subsysteme des Makrosystems integritäts- und integrationsorientiert erörtert, bevor anschließend das integrale bewusstseins-bewusste integrale interkulturelle Management erörtert werden wird.

Die drei Stufen der Erkenntnis und ihrer Anwendung können mit der ebenfalls dreistufigen Spitze des Universal-Kulturmanagement Modells in Teil II, 2.2 korreliert werden. Die drei kulminieren im Absoluten teleologischer Schöpfer-zentrierter Holographie der Holographien, die in Korinther 15 (siehe S. 14) formuliert ist: Es ist das Ziel, auf das sich alle Holographien zubewegen, das eine Feld dessen personalisierte Herrschaft – „damit Gott herrscht über alles und in allem“ – das Alpha und Omega ist, das wir bislang unzulänglich als Hologramm bezeichnen und trotz dessen scheinbarer intellektueller Sophistikation die Rechnung ohne den eigentlichen Wirt und eigentlichen Herrscher aller und in allem machen. Und es ist eben gerade dieser Sachverhalt, der wissenschaftlich verkleidet, den Sachverhalt konstituiert, der Gegenstand der Unterwerfung und somit der Reintegration in die eine Wahrheit des einen myriadenfach divers abgebildeten Systems aller Systeme ist.

Wissenschaft und Pseudowissenschaft sind offenbar auch als menschliche Relativierungen des Absoluten und seines alleinigen Herrschaftsanspruchs zu verstehen, eine mögliche Verbannung der eigentlichen Steuerungsfunktion des Bewusstseins, dessen quantische, holographische und begrenzt eschatologischen Prozesse nur durch die Einbettung in ihre teleologische Finalität einer Schöpfer-zentrierten höchsten Holographie – GOTT – der menschlich zugänglichen Realität der Schöpfungs-, Kultur- und Menschenerkenntnis nahe kommen. Solange diese Einbettung in ihren Urgrund und Ziel, die Prima Causa, das eine Agens und Leben, nicht erfolgt und in reduktiven Relativierungsprozessen fortbesteht, dauert der Unterwerfungskampf gegen die Feinde der Relativierung des Absoluten fort und manifestiert sich als menschlicher, kultureller und Schöpfungskonflikt, der sich in allen menschlichen, umweltlichen, kulturellen und interkulturellen, ökologischen etc. Subsystemen manifestiert. Die Natur-, Geistes- und sozialwissenschaftlichen, ebenso wie die New Age Spiritualität in all ihren vermeintlich humanistischen Varianten sind, soweit sie reduktiv und relativierend inbezug auf das Ziel der Schöpfung sind, Teil dessen, was erst durch dessen Unterwerfung durch den, dessen Mission mit der Unterwerfung aller Feinde endet; und der Feind ist die Negierung der Herrschaft dessen, der der Herrscher ist. Unter diesem höchsten eschatologischen, teleologischen Schöpfer-zentrierten Blickwinkel kann uns die vermeintliche Wissenschaft Sand in die Augen streuen, wenn sie Ultima Ratio und erste Ursache alles Seienden aus dem menschlichen Bewusstseinshorizont verdrängt und dafür statistische und formelhafte Erkenntnisfragmente losgelöst von ihrem eigentlichen Schöpfungskontext mit ihrer Herrschaftsstruktur anbietet. Deshalb sind jene schöpfungskontextrelativierten Erkenntnisse für den Menschen defizitär und somit nutzlos und kontraproduktiv, solange, bis sie in den Kontext der Holographie des Alpha und Omega gerückt werden.

Trennt man die Quelle und den Strom, so versiegt letzterer und die Landschaften verdorren. Trennt man die Wurzeln des Baumes von diesem, so verdorrt er und bringt keine Früchte und der Mensch und die Geschöpfe haben keine Nahrung mehr. Diese Metaphern illustrieren die Notwendigkeit der Nichtrelativierung und Abstrahierung der tiefsten Ursachen des Lebens, dem alle Phänomene des Lebens nachgeordnet sind: Nur jene wissenschaftlichen Systematisierungen, die den ganzen Strom des Lebens, den ganzen Baum des Lebens, die unsichtbaren Wurzeln und die sichtbaren Teile des Baumes miteinbeziehen, sind wahrhaft holographisch und repräsentieren die Ganzheit und Einheit, die Kennzeichen des Lebens sind.

1 Kor 15,24 Danach kommt das Ende, wenn er jede Macht, Gewalt und Kraft vernichtet hat und seine Herrschaft Gott, dem Vater, übergibt.

1 Kor 15,25 Denn er muss herrschen, bis Gott ihm alle Feinde unter die Füße gelegt hat.

1 Kor 15,26 Der letzte Feind, der entmachtet wird, ist der Tod.

1 Kor 15,27 Sonst hätte er ihm nicht alles zu Füßen gelegt. Wenn es aber heißt, alles sei unterworfen, ist offenbar der ausgenommen, der ihm alles unterwirft.

1 Kor 15,28 Wenn ihm dann alles unterworfen ist, wird auch er, der Sohn, sich dem unterwerfen, der ihm alles unterworfen hat, damit Gott herrscht über alles und in allem.

Quelle: Online Version der Bibel

II Vishua Chaytana – Formulation of a Global Consciousness-Based Global Inter/Transcultural Management Science

1 The completion of the intercultural edifice

When one leaves the land of diversity-based duality knowledgeably one enters the “promised land” of human unity. In hindsight the former can be seen in the latter’s likeness. Both are part of a complete map of culture.

The title „The completion of the intercultural edifice” implies the end of a process; the process of reading the book of culture and to behave and act on the basis of the contents of the book. The contents are either fully understood and the book can be shelved to be reopened occasionally for purposes such as educational ones, for example, or, alternatively, the paradigm contained in the book has been transcended and the contents have become partly or fully obsolete.

The present exposé can be considered as a process of returning for a moment to the old paradigm in order to connect it to the new, supposedly more advanced one. When we look back at the brief history of culture, interculturalism and associated intercultural research that has been inaugurated in the late 20th century, we note that it responds to perceived needs in the world of globalizing business, diplomacy and strategy. Among the first intercultural scholars in the modern sense therefore were theoreticians who were more or less involved in these domains and institutional or organizational environments. One thinks of the American anthropologist Hall and the Dutchmen Hofstede and Trompenaars. The former has been the head of the Foreign Service Institute, whose task consisted in the preparation of US diplomats for international assignments and the two Dutchmen were employed by US or European global corporations such as IBM and the Shell Corporation. With the progress of globalization and information science the field of intercultural research has been pushed further by some scientists who tried to solve the enigma of cultural diversity in more sophisticated ways to further the needs of their institutional or organizational environments. If we try to recapitulate this brief history of intercultural research we can systematize it as follows

A synopsis of modern intercultural studies

illustration not visible in this excerpt

Finally, I would like to sum up the totality of intercultural research at a paradigmatic level:

illustration not visible in this excerpt

(All these authors have undertaken their research many decades after the appearance of the quantum paradigm; Hofstede, THT and Brannen’s and Salk’s cultural assumptions are increasingly characterized by indeterminism. The table is an approximation.)

It seems to me that the history of intercultural research replicates the lead science paradigms within a more limited temporal horizon that the wider ones in which they have evolved. The development of hard science paradigms took centuries to evolve from a deterministic world view represented by Newton, for example, via quantum physics to the most modern physics of our time. See the lower table above highlighting the progression from determinism, via indeterminism to probabilism with their scholarly representatives and the associated metaphorical translation to assumptions and approaches within the field culture and its management. Of course, this replication of centuries of scientific investigation in the hard sciences could be replicated epistemologically in less than half a century because the fundamental sciences that were dealing with the foundations of existence and nature had done the preparatory work at a fundamental level whose insights could be transposed from natural to social sciences

With the advent of global strategic interests in the late 20th century and on the basis of the foundations laid by natural sciences, man became similarly puzzled by the diversity of man as the diversity of fauna and flora had been puzzling him already centuries earlier, whereupon he undertook research into the outer domain of nature. The biologist and zoologist therefore have finished their classificatory work of nature long ago and provided extensive taxonomies with associated characteristics of the organisms within the field of their interest. Therefore we know, for example, how many variations of particular animals and plants - how many phenotypes of a genotype – have been developing as well as their biological and behavioral profiles along with full information on their ecosystems and the complex interrelations of those organisms and their ecosystems. In other words outer nature, from the aunt to the galaxy, has been mapped rather completely. And the translation of this process of mapping of non-human nature to human nature has been attempted by more external criteria along with a correlation of assumptions about human internal features. But it was progressively abandoned as it was seen to promote racism and fascism.

So, the intercultural process could only be triggered when man was ready - after his inquisitive gaze had completed the outer horizon - to also direct his eyes to the inner horizons of man in order to complete a 360° perception of man. After all one had noticed that man had a cultural, an inner dimension that was part and parcel of his make-up and could not be ignored, as it was seen to determine parts of his behaviour. And when this 360° perception of man is completed the classification of the human species would be completed and fill the reference books as do the books on animals, plants and stars for example. This process is coming to an end in the same way as the processes of classification of the outer world were completed. Then the deeper inquiry in the nature of the information began that determines the live of plants and creates in general. This was the biological paradigm with the genetic highlight and its genetic engineering application which is not yet conclusive for human cultural, ethical as well as technical reasons.

Animals and plants behave according to their genetic information. There is little alternative for them. In the human case, however, things a more complex as man enjoys a greater range of freedom. And as soon as man deals with his own diversity he steps out of the realm of oneness with nature into duality and therefore dialectics between the diverse components of the landscape of human diversity. These dialects are very frequently antagonistic and produce the opposite of what they are intended to produce, which is more duality and dialectics-based antagonisms because man has only classified the distinctive features without also covering complementary human psychological characteristics of concomitantly existing integrative psychological features. In other words he has disassembled for classificatory purposes, without being able to provide the integrative information about human integrative features, within and between men. All he managed to do was to provide approaches to the reconfiguration of cultural profiles to benefit vested interests in the domain of strategy, business and other cross-border activities. The notion of synergy has arisen to consecrate the apogee of this approach, without however being able to cut the Gordon knot of the “missing link”, i.e. the identification and revelation of the whole picture of complementary differentiative-integrative information about man and in particular human psychological culture.

In other words the fundamental information that transcends the process of duality and often antagonizing dialectics of culture, which deals with a return to unity, has been disregarded so far by mainstream interculturalism. And as long as the complementary human characteristics to his diversity characteristics, i. e. his also existing characteristics of integration and return from the state of division and divisiveness of the intercultural approach, are not likewise considered, the mapping of the human cultural mind is not completed. And as long as it is not completed it does not truly reflect the more complete nature of man. And an incomplete information, however well assembled and configured, yields similarly deficitary results.

That which was supposed to solve human diversity challenges seems so be at times part of the problem rather than part of the solution. As long as one remains in the cultural space of duality and diversity one cannot expect anything else but products of duality which are frequently characterized by antagonism, because that is what is contained in the seed of this approach and, however sophisticated the approaches, they cannot transcend their dualistic nature. The state of affairs of the world that coincides with this era of research and the attempts to reconfigure international/intercultural processes based on intercultural research testify to the limited applicability of these approaches in global business and geopolitics… alike.

That does not mean that intercultural approaches are false. A child that is not fully developed is not in any way incorrect either. It has just not fully realized the information of completeness in his make-up. They are a promise. Similarly the intercultural approach is incomplete and a promise of completion. If it is not completed, however, it will not go beyond childlike solutions of playing with diversity rather than dealing with it in a truly complete and therefore much more effective way, in line with the need of our time. They real need of the completion of the intercultural edifice is bound to challenge the complete information about cultural man.

In order to complete the intercultural edifice one has to provide the complementary information about human integrative characteristics along with the divisive characteristics. That completion provides the information for the return from duality to unity. This more complete cultural information provides sustainable cultural solutions. And we can learn from the evolution of science paradigms what steps may to be taken to advance and complete the intercultural edifice. The complete information about cultural man is similarly more effective as the more complete information about nature proved to be more effective in other domains.

By now we can specify the title of the treatise by saying that the book of culture that operates in the domain of duality should be closed in order to inaugurate the paradigm shift towards complementary diversity- unity information about man that is supposed to be more in line with today’s world’s needs and human aspirations. There can be nothing new unless the old is put where it belongs, i. e. on the shelves of the archives of time and social science to give way to the new, for duality, dialectics and antagonism, though engineered as complementarity, deny the unity assumptions. Duality and unity are causally connected but they simultaneously exclude each other. However the design of man and hard science paradigms instructs us however how these two are causally connected and how they can be reassembled and reintegrated in a sense making way. Indeed their integration is the break-through to a new paradigm that provides the complete cultural information about man. This completeness provides more complete and sustainable results. So, we are, in a way, using hard science and human science to complete the comprehensive cultural mapping of man, in line with the assumption of the replication of hard science paradigm shifts in social science, within more limited temporal horizons. We are closing Volume 1 of the book of culture and we open Volume 2 which provides the complete informational mapping of cultural man whose provisional wholeness provides more wholistic cultural solutions.

I have developed the five P approach based on metaphors of physiology and physics, of metaphysics, philosophy and psychology to translate and apply complementary scientific paradigms to the furthering of the understanding of culture and to more effective intercultural management. I have described this approach often already and I would like to present it again in a nutshell: The more complete human cultural map which is more likely to light the cultural path of man; the path of diversification as well as its completion by the path of potential integration:

2 Design of a scientifically-based diversity-integrative transcultural profiler

2.1 The state of the intercultural art and science

On human relativity in intercultural research

NATO has contributed its share to the liberation of Libya. It is not yet sure, whether, from the western standpoint, that is liberation into the past or into the future, as the introduction of a form of Islamic law has also been announced. Culture and religion are important components of culture indeed and seem to be stronger than presumed attractiveness of western ideology. Exactly a fortnight ago media have been reporting about an escalating demonstration by Coptic Christians in Cairo which has caused a considerable number of victims, which has, however, been trivialized by some media by presenting it as business as usual in this part of the world. And as if I was not enough, the seismic changes of the Arab spring, which also involves Syria and other nations of the Maghreb and the Mashreg, culminates so far in a strong physical earthquake today in Turkey. The Euro crisis and the sword of Damocles of a global financial crisis are again threatening to strike and “Boycott Wall Street” movements in culturally diverse forms question the legitimacy of the global financial system. The gaps between the haves and the have-nots as well as the cultural gaps between players are seemingly widening to such an extent that the geological earth drifts apart as much as the social world. And this fragmentation and antagonizing atomization seems to have its cause in a divisive force in the human psyche which should be looked at in search of a remedy for the ongoing externalization of division with its logic of conflict. It raises the questions of integrative forces in man to counterbalance divisive forces. The spirit of division in many shapes and forms seems to prevail over the spirit of unity, from the local to the global, from the personal to a worldwide scale. Is that the shadow of today’s technologically feasible global integration? However, conditioned separation and division as well as a priori given essential unity of man are both aspects of man. When this complementary reality is lost out of sight dysfunctionalities occur in the organism of humanity. So the question seems to arise how this lopsided prioritization of human anthropological reality can be rebalanced, how the game of the perennial centrifugal and centripetal forces in many garbs can be harmonized and reintegrated. More culturally and abstractly speaking the question arises, how the integration and reconciliation of myriads of singular forms and shapes and types of human diversity on the one hand and their essential unity as members of humanity on the other hand can be realized. The realization of the complementary synergetic function of both aspects of man’s constitution has a naturally conflict preventative impact, because the natural divisive forces are contained by the natural integrative forces. The perception of the whole has a controlling function, an integrative and pacifying impact within and as a consequence also without. Deficits with regard to the perception of this reality as an interdependent whole, which results from socialization as much as cultural conditioning - in fact it is part of fundamental overall human conditioning of man across cultures and civilizations - lead to a structural and functional imbalance of man that is counterproductive to the development of humanity from a diverse human species to a solidary human family with all its diversity. In the following we want to focus our attention on the contribution of intercultural research to the correction of this state of affairs in order to complement presumable deficits in intercultural theory and practice in view of enhanced global management. Not presumptuousness moves and motivates such a lofty perspective but rather the need to address a presumed core issue of human affairs. And unity is not a form of vague idealism but rather a functional aspect of the human.

A parabolic story in which an individual is looking for an object in the light of a lantern can be considered symbolic of mainstream intercultural research. When a passer-by asks the searching individual where exactly he has lost the object, the latter answers that it must have been a little further away, whereupon the puzzled passer- by further asks why he was not looking where he assumes he has lost the object in question. The searcher answered that he was looking here in the light of the lantern because the visibility was better in the light of the lantern.

Some intercultural research does not seem unlike the search of the lost item in our didactic, parabolic anecdote, as there seems to be a tendency to enquire within the known, rather than exploring new horizons that might cast a new, creative light on the object the research. While, for example, quantified sophistication is certainly legitimate and may provide precious insights and meet a human need for formula- like certainty based on specific numbers without ambiguity it does not necessarily mean that the researcher leaves the already charted territory of the known and comes closer to the destination aimed at by the pioneers of true intercultural research, which consists, so to speak, in the realization of a form of cultural Eldorado in the sense that man may reach masterhood in the control of the ambivalence of the culture variable with its divisive as well as its integrative and synergistic potentiality alike in this era of globalization with its increasing cultural challenges across the world as we have seen and said in the few introductory examples that epitomize the state of the world.

A quantum-cultural reading of cultural and intercultural reality suggests that specific data of cultures need to be complemented by the complementary momentum of cultures. It fulfills the metaphorical imperative of the complementarity principle Niels Bohr’s as well as of the insight gained from Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle. Both together allow us to view culture from two complementary angles and to state about the integration of the two optics: On the one hand there is the specific world of cultures with specific cultural data and coordinates based on empirical intercultural research, while the complementary optic is that of their wave dynamic and momentum. In order to integrate the two and to describe culture and its dynamics holistically, one has to leverage a neurophysiological analogy of twofold structural and functional integration. Not doing so means lagging behind scientific paradigms in the sense that the particle approach to cultures, where each culture is attributed a particular numerical position needs to be complemented by its dynamic momentum. The former tends to be more static, is classificatory and divisive per se, while the latter is dynamic and integrative. Both together constitute the more complete cultural reality that performs better globally in business management and politics alike and therefore needs to be leveraged in our time of increasing globalization challenges.

Quantum physics has not only allowed outer space conquest but it can also enable inner space conquest with the totality of its cultural conditioning. In other words the intercultural acquis (research output), as I shall try to show, needs to be complemented by the transcultural approach, which is a metaphorical application of the microphysics paradigm that has been inaugurated as long as a century ago already. Therefore it is high time to translate this epistemological breakthrough discovery as far as possible to the sociocultural domain as well.

The hope that global business, global communications and transportation infrastructure against the backdrop of an even wider scaled space research, in short, that advanced technology would also bring about the cultural integration of the planet and would complete the technically feasible global village socioculturally as well remained unfulfilled so far. On the contrary, rather than peacefully and solidarily, as in olden days but in new forms, draw the vital resources from the common wellsprings of the one village, in a spirit of worldwide interdependence and therefore solidary unity, we are in a process of technological convergence paralleled by cultural divergence. Some indicators for the drifting apart of the world, albeit coupled with the quest for the realization of synergy potentials in transnational management are, for example, that the perceived multicultural threat to the integrity of cultural identity in transnational organizational environments can lead to defensive, ethnocentric attitudes and behaviours that are humanly divisive rather than integrative. In some urban environments there is, in addition to the understandable need of cultural solidarity within foreign cultural environments, a trend to cultural ghettoization, which again is divisive rather than integrative. And in geopolitics and the economy, as one can deduce from the Euro crisis and that of the global financial system for example, there is a trend to undermine the integrative acquis of decades of integration policy by multilayered national cultural interests based divisive behaviours. National and supranational identities need further reconciliation and integration while obviously safeguarding cultural uniqueness as the basis for intercultural synergies, in the interest of a sustainable future at large. The game of the two fundamental forces – as in physics –, those that weld mankind together and those that rip it apart seem to have mankind in their grip as much as the gravitational and the antigravitational pull in nature. And when imbalances become too strong seismic change occurs as much in society as in nature. That leads to cyclical catharsis for the recovery of the balance of centrifugal-centripetal forces in diverse domains and shapes.

Half of the wars waged during the past decades were apparently motivated by the struggle for water and land and the two can be subsumed as the competition for food, as both resources together enable the resulting resource of food or in their absence lead to a lack of it and thereby undermine survival. Then the ensuing question of survival may be connected to deeply rooted and at times irrational motives like that of cultural overidentification for the sake of presumed insurance of survival – which may of course backfire and cause destruction of self an others alike – which may be difficult to control. Culture and its management-dependent ambivalence are at risk of becoming a focus of power and identity processes in the competition for food and the survival of cultural groups increasing in number and size that might be tempted to use and play the card of cultural identity in the power game about the access to resources. Culture and survival issues might therefore be at risk of forming a not so holy alliance in view of the future of humanity with its likely challenges. But in spite of this projected negative scenario that involves culture, that latter, if properly and more thoroughly understood can nevertheless also be a potential factor of integration of the planet as a whole. This dichotomy and its effective management in the interest of man is a tenor of this study. Whether culture plays the role of a factor of integration or of disintegration of mankind at its diverse scales and in its multilayered human contexts depends on the depth of its understanding and its management in the light of such enhanced insight with practical relevance.

From this vantage point one may ask whether the cultural question has been posed comprehensively enough, so as to lead to complete answers that involve the root causes of cultural processes whose understanding allows the sustainable management of culture. For, as long as one does not manage to penetrate to the root of culture and understands its rationale in depth one will keep turning in circles and gilding the cage the culture gurus have designed, assuming that one has achieved masterhood over cultural issues, without, however, ever finding the actual key that would allow one to open that golden cage and to access the path towards freedom in the sense of a more comprehensive management and control of the key cultural variable within man’s psychological constitution.

The well-known North American architect Frank Lloyd Wright was framing his architectural design challenge as the need of “cracking the box”, so as to integrate the structure with the environment in a new way. Well the intercultural box and the architectural box may indeed be likened, as both seem to require a wider and better performing contextualization in a wider whole that provides more sense and purpose.

The physical and the psychological definition of space do not lack a certain similarity. They however differ in a subtle way in the sense that the physical edifice had to be integrated into the Arizona desert at the time of Lloyds architectural research, while the psychological structure with its socio-culturally conditioned content has to be taken out of the limited desert of the mind to be reintegrated in the vaster space of human consciousness, so as to uncover the true meaning and logic of culture and to enhance the performance of its management by the wider horizon, that provides access to its governing axiomatic and thereby shows how culture can be recontextualized in a way that reengineers it from a sword into a plough that can help solving the human nutrition issue physically as well as psychologically: the need for healthy cultural identity and food alike.

In other words, the human mind with its conditioned sociocultural content, needs to be relocated in its wider context of the human spirit. This opening and resetting of the limited cage or box will show what the actual meaning of culture is within the context of human evolution. By perceiving the complete picture culture becomes manageable from the widest angle of vision and therefore the greatest sustainability and effectiveness. It becomes a true resource for the future of mankind rather than a potential treat. Practically the cultural and the intercultural will have to be embedded or recontextualized in an inner space that transcends them and which can therefore be called culture transcending human consciousness or transcultural consciousness. The inter-transcultural complementarity with the command, control and integration function of the transcultural with regard to the intercultural, based on a psychophysiological axiomatic can be leveraged for the benefit of man at every level and in every walk of life by global professional manager and common man alike. Finally one may rhetorically ask whether it is not necessary to create a more solid foundation for a structure in terms of scope in order to increase the performance, the bearing power and the capacity of the building, whether the building be physical or psychological in nature. In that sense we will design a bigger and more performing edifice that can house culture and its peaceful management comfortably.

2.2 Enhancing the intercultural art and science

Sources, models and the achievement of supreme cultural intelligence

Intercultural theoreticians as well as practitioners sometimes tend to forget, in addition to the contributions of the diverse civilizations of the world to the topic, which we shall review later on, what the sciences of life, matter and energy as well as religion as an all-encompassing time transcending understanding of life can contribute to a complementary epistemological, transcultural perception of cultural diversity and its effective and sustainable management that suffices the global management imperative of our global multicultural age.

The transcultural and transdisciplinary perception and insight, which we shall look at in greater detail in the course of this exposé, are among other readings, last but not least also transpositions of hard scientific evidence, albeit at a metaphorical rather than a concrete level of course. I am referring more specifically to Niels Bohr’s complementarity principle, formulated in 1927 already. It is among quantum physics breakthrough discoveries which have enabled modern high-tech civilization right to space conquest. Not only the management of physical space but also that of psychological space can benefit from such principles, provided they are carefully - with due respect to the specificity to the disciplines - translated to other levels of life and research. Objections against the crossing of disciplines are legitimate and need to be carefully scrutinized in order to prevent confusion. But not attempting the judicious metaphorical translation of fundamental laws of existence, which due to their fundamentality affect everything that is supported by that foundation in nature as a whole, has not been and does not seem to be pardoned by history. On the contrary, the omission has called a form of scientific nemesis on to the world’s stage in the shape of the greatest cultural conflicts of human history. The translation and application of lead-paradigm shifts for an enhanced view of life is not only more appropriate epistemologically but also more ethical, because it is more truthful. And truth is one in which true science and true ethics seem to converge and guide human understanding and action in a new light, the light of truth which is sustainable per se. But it is never too late. Therefore let’s get started hic et nunc, here and now. At least the question needs to be raised in order to be not held accountable by history for an epochal omission.

It is also necessary to correctly read the principles of evolution with their logic of differentiation and integration in view of their translation to the management of cultural diversity. This duality is not to be interpreted antagonistically, guided by the individual and collective ego, but rather as a means of evolution for the purpose of furthering its finality of continuous enhancement. Microphysics as well as neurophysiology seem to illustrate that the principle of complementary dualities can contribute to a more effective conceptualization and description not only of material but also of immaterial expressions and manifestations of life, in particular from an application-oriented standpoint.

In the domain of biology a most determining complementary duality along with its integration comes into being at the very beginning of life itself, to such an extent that is seems to be the actual hallmark and leitmotiv of life per se, with myriads of variations and transpositions of its guiding theme. I am referring to the life enabling, unifying integration of the diverse complementary male and female genetic information in the fertilized ovum. Not heeding this activity of the intelligence of life itself from its very beginning does not permit either the correct understanding of the entire biographical course of this constitutional biological complementary duality. It is always advisable to reconnect to that root cause and compass of life as it adapts to and interacts with the environment in order to understand it anew at the diverse levels of its individual and social outforming. It is the assumed tenor of life and also of culture and therefore of this study. How much the very science of genetics is aware of the critical balances involved in this assumption will finally also decide on its destructiveness or creativity. What authority should the genetic feasibility enthusiasts be accountable to for irreversible manipulations of essential and implacable balances of life that condition its existence or inexistence? Are they apprentis sorciers? Can they be allowed to be such potentially corrupting agents of life? This question would, however, go beyond the scope of this essay, as it involves the question of culture and ethics in general and that of scientific culture and ethics in particular. It involves their duality and therefore seems to require an agent for the sustainable integration of that duality in order to prevent the ambivalence with regard the use of the acquis of genetics and its engineering. It is part of the overall integration of human duality in order to prevent a replication of what has happened with regard of the ambivalent use of quantum physics in the nuclear domain, which has been regretted by the leading scientists.

The translation of a principle of life and evolution to the sociocultural level, which cannot but also be supported by the very basis of life itself, besides which there is no other to our knowledge - in the interest of humanity and without its corruption by the dynamic of ego and greed - is not more and not less than a logical conclusion and a cultural act, worthy of civilized man.

But the contrary seems to occur, as one may infer from trends of corruption of that condition of existence itself in the shape of attitudes and behaviors of sexual competition, for example, or in the form of interferences with prenatal life. Here, the interdependence and complementary integration of life, its unity, does not always seem to be perceived. Such oblivion and estrangement from the fact of life itself, from its biological truth without alternative is a deviation from the one and only way of life – for there is no body and no life of replacement -. Such is the way, the truth and life which, in the religious optic, is epitomized by Christ, from who all men are images, albeit in myriads of diverse appearances, yet essentially united by the ultimate metaphysical template which is God in the appearance of Christ. In that sense religion is the ultimate panacea and sustainable solution for diversity issues of any kind.

It is necessary to know the corset of cultural conditioning and to also be able to liberate oneself from it when solutions within the known are out of sight. Or, in the golden cage metaphor, it may be necessary to transcend that cage, to free oneself thereof and to cut asunder the Gordian knot of the cultural logic of conflict when all attempts at solving and ending it seem to be exhausted, or, paraphrasing Shakespeare, when all ”cultural remedies are past” and no conventional cultural remedies seem to be left. In that way the culturally conditioned sorrow of man can be mitigated, which leads to the second part of Shakespeare’s stanza, i.e. „the cultural sorrow is over.“ In other words, the phylogenetic human endowment for the transcendence of the socio-cultural, mental space within by the noetic, metamental or transcultural dimension of a wider biologically-based space of consciousness can effect a wisely-integrative solution to all human diversity-related challenges. It appears as if the wisdom of life itself had foreseen from its very dawn that integrative option teleologically as an ever accessible rescue and resource of life for the regulation of its entire course of evolution in order to always be able to recover its integrity within a context of evolutionarily necessary diversification. It appears to be the very game of life that, although it may seem puzzling at the surface, makes sense at a deeper level of understanding. And the understanding compliance with it, based on the perception of the logic as a whole along with its evolutionary rationale, sets man free from diversity-conditioned struggle, as the ways of nature, of life, the very truth of life itself, are unraveled thereby. The complementary perception of the two strands of the game of evolution highlights the essential oneness of life with its dynamic that unveils its enigma to the perceiver. More specifically, culturally speaking, if the complementary transcultural integrative aspect of the intercultural surface view can be operationalized, then cultural sorrow that is due to human cultural astigmatism in the wider sense is truly gone by. Is that not the beginning of the fulfillment of the objective formulated in the heading of the chapter that intends to enhance the art and science of culture?

The transcultural dimension can be supported scientifically by hard and softer social sciences alike, as well as by religion and the diverse epistemologies and philosophies across civilizations, space, time and culture alike. It can enable a supreme cultural device for the management and control of the cultural diversity dimension within mankind at the individual as much as at the social level. When all cultural measures within intercultural frames and spaces of the mind fail, then the art and science integrating and transcending dimension space of pristine consciousness can - as at the source of the spring of a river before it is laden with the debris of its course and free form the cultural sorrow that man has brought about by his own deficitary cultural insight - provide a cryptic remedy. “When remedies are past, the sorrow is over“, provided the transcultural dimension can be operationalized. Otherwise, the cultural dimension remains, in spite of its synergy and creativity potentialities, part of the cause of man’s existential sorrow. - The understanding of the concomitance of the complementary dimensions of singular diversity and essential unity enhances both in a superordinate formula of existence and evolution while it removes its conflict potentiality.

The access and initialization of such a survival mechanism, provided by evolution, through the transcendence of the cultural may be required when the ship of mankind threatens to crash on the rocks of the waves of culture generated by the human mind with its cultural conditioning. It reminds one of George Bernard Shaw foretelling of the imminent First World War in his play “Heartbreak House”, when a he states that nothing happens, except that a ship is crashing on the rocks. And the rocks of nationalism of that epoch are not unlike the (tidal) waves of culture in our time and the foreseeable future. However, the difference between the two eras lies is the fact, that today, if man is willing, he can steer the ship of mankind to the harbour of destination of cultural peace in the safer waters of a true transnational and transcultural dimension that can prevent its being torpedoed by destructive culture waves and reefs and rocks of a culturally unenlightened human mind. Man can heed or ignore the signs of the time. History confronts man in another spiral turn with an analogous challenge. The awareness-based response or non-response has conditioned his destiny then as it does now as it seems. And far from gloom and doom philosophy the challenge also points to solutions instead of irreversible destiny; a shift of the focus of human awareness so as to also encompass, beyond the aspect of surface divisions, complementary essential integrity, solidarity and unity of the human family. One may call it idealism or a fact of existence. Why should existence not be an ideal scenario? Has it not to be one to perform its monumental task? Practically the seemingly insurmountable Himalayas of conflicting diversity profiles are dwarfed to insignificance by an enlightened transcultural mindset. With its development and transcultural awareness the diverse elevations on the cultural map of the world that constitute man’s cultural mental software appear as an interdependent organic tissue of diverse elevations that make up the topography of the world’s terrain, physical, cultural, societal and personal. It is the transcultural software of the mind and consciousness that allows its conflict free navigation. We have to move from specific interculturalism to holistic interculturalism, from symptomatic to holistic interculturalism that sees the entire organism as explanatory of the diverse limbs of the organism. That shift from symptomatic approaches to integrated approaches has been accomplished by branches of medicine and many other sciences. Now it is culture’s turn as well. The transcultural mental software is that complementary add-on that meets the need of the day and the age. It can be likened to the soaring eagle above rugged mountain chains of diverse cultural clusters or to the cybernetic autopilot that navigates man’s cultural routes and destinations based on superordinate information management mechanisms. Transcultural consciousness-based transcultural intelligence provides this cultural autopiloting capability that integrates and transcends human diversity of any shape, form or type in an appropriate way. And the view of the whole is aware of interdependent wholeness in diversity and tends to be naturally ethical. And with that new ethics the lack of ethics-based malfunctioning of our civilization (business, finance, and cultural emancipation of groups as in the Balkans etc…) can be corrected and made sustainable again.

A great number of the wars in recent times were motivated, as has been pointed out already, by the competition for two major resources, namely those of water and land, which amounts to the competition for food, as both resources condition this resulting resource from water and territory.

Culture is ambiguous if its particle aspect is looked at while its wave aspect is excluded and vice versa. A wholistic quantum cultural reading of culture, however, has an impact on future scenarios. The natural trend of the divisive cultural momentum can be counterbalanced by its complementary integrative momentum once it is leveraged. And therein consists a possible remedy for potential cultural conflict.

For, among the future scenarios one can also imagine one from the cultural standpoint, which assumes the shape, that diverse cultural groups might be tempted, due to demographic and ethnocentric processes in a general context of scarceness of resources and precarization, to use culture as a strategic arm for survival, as we have similarly seen in the case of national, racial and religious fundamentalisms during the course of history and more specifically of more recent human history. After all, national racial, ethnic, linguistic and religious identity are part of a still vague notion of culture, of that which constitutes the multifactored singularity of man and societies. Yet, if a complementarity-based notion of culture can underpin a more wholistic understanding of it, its divisive and integrative components are provided with a mechanism of checks and balances that can prevent a getting out of control of cultural processes.

One could simplify this by arguing, that if psychological culture forms an unholy alliance with physical culture conditions a potentialization occurs, which can only be offset by the complementary notion of culture that is cognizant of its integrative dynamic in addition to its divisive dynamic. Can therefore a more differentiated understanding of culture bring about a turnaround in human history? Maybe the transdisciplinary contextualization and insight into culture in the sense of an enhanced cooperation of the creature of creation with the truth and the logic of that creation appease the Creator or the dynamic of creation. As long as this even wider contextualization of cultural dynamics does not occur, and man does not heed the all-comprehensive context he may be held accountable for it by cultural nemesis. From an authentic Christian civilization standpoint the non-compliance with the primal source and its equally twofold complementary law of love of God and one’s neighbour hold man at ransom in the cage of his limited constructs. And, one may ask, whether cultural issues are not better cared for by entrusting them in His hands than by entrusting them exclusively to a seemingly sophisticated and presumptuous science, which may, in the present garb only be the consecration of its ultimate ignorance, as intellectual constructs and cultural reality are positioned at a dead angle to each other as long as the latter is not understood more completely, as suggested for example by the cultural translation of hard science paradigms, more specifically, for example, of the complementarity principle. More constructively one may ask whether the above referred to unholy alliance can, once more, be remedied by a complementarity-based scientific-metaphysic understanding of life of which culture has to be viewed as a component, a variable that may be magnified or minimized by the quality of mind and consciousness. And as long as that complete view does not dawn, Hegel’s dictum according to which “we learn from history that we learn nothing from” it cannot change fundamentally. Yet this is a wider question that entails a more fundamental review of culture and civilization, in particular of western rationalism – which is no discreditation of much needed reason, on the contrary -, that seems to be able to lead the horse to the water without, however, being able to make it drink as the saying goes. There is a difficulty in this term in the sense that the supreme source of creation is termed “logos”, translating as word or reason, whereas reason in the sense of Cartesianism usually refers to a limited cultural product of reason in the sense of the mind. On lifting the reductionist siege of reason by the mind one may possibly come closer to the metaphysical rather than the merely philosophical notion of reason. And that is again a supreme strategy for the understanding of creation and constitutes the royal path of integration of its myriads of multidimensional diversity in an all-encompassing logic of unity and integrity. So, while limited reason torpedoes this supreme integration of unity and diversity the complementary semantics of reason is the supreme creation and integration principle. The understanding of reason in the sense of ”logos” unveils the entire rationale of creation and the Creator and that is the ultimate logic of all phenomena of which culture is but an aspect, which therefore requires a recontextualization in the rationale of creation. Thus recontextualized in its true place, where it belongs, it assumes its real meaning and purpose which is only positive and life enhancing as long as it is not grabbed by a reductionist mind for its idiocentric purposes, whereby it assumes its creative-destructive ambivalence and the human travail of its arduous management.

[...]

Ende der Leseprobe aus 260 Seiten

Details

Titel
Quantum Cultural Management - Quantenkulturelles Management
Untertitel
Transcultural Management based on the quantum paradigm, neuroscience and consciousness research - Transkulturelles Management auf der Basis des Quantenparadigmas, der Neurowissenschaften und der Bewusstseinsforschung
Veranstaltung
interkulturelles Management
Autor
Jahr
2012
Seiten
260
Katalognummer
V196026
ISBN (eBook)
9783656242062
Dateigröße
2877 KB
Sprache
Deutsch
Anmerkungen
in Englisch und Deutsch/English and Germsn
Schlagworte
multidimensionale-transdisziplinäre interkulturelle Forschung, naturwissenschaftlich-geisteswissenschaftlich-sozialwissenschaftlich basierte interkulturelle Forschung, 5 P - Physiologie-Physik-Metaphysik-Psychologie-Philosophie transkulturelle Managementforschung, interdisciplinary intercultural management
Arbeit zitieren
D.E.A./UNIV. PARIS I Gebhard Deissler (Autor), 2012, Quantum Cultural Management - Quantenkulturelles Management, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/196026

Kommentare

  • Noch keine Kommentare.
Im eBook lesen
Titel: Quantum Cultural  Management - Quantenkulturelles Management



Ihre Arbeit hochladen

Ihre Hausarbeit / Abschlussarbeit:

- Publikation als eBook und Buch
- Hohes Honorar auf die Verkäufe
- Für Sie komplett kostenlos – mit ISBN
- Es dauert nur 5 Minuten
- Jede Arbeit findet Leser

Kostenlos Autor werden