The principle of democracy is one of equal dignity for all cultures. But today the relationship between culture and politics, though close, often appears tense and occasionally contradictory. The introduction to this issue of Diogenes sketches the work done by UNESCO in the frame of the ‘Pathways of Thought' Programme, particularly relating to the way in which a pluralist identity is created in multicultural nations, and to the relationship between non-material heritage, democracy and the quest for new forms of governance.

This editor's introduction to the issue recalls the main methodological approaches to persuasion, rhetoric and propaganda in social psychology. It summarizes the classical theories issued from Hovland's Yale Communication Program in experimental social psychology, like dissonance, attitude changes, inoculation approach, elaboration likelihood model. Yet there are, today, competing perspectives on persuasion, which turn attention to the meaning of persuasion in modern complex societies, in technology and the media. These perspectives place emphasis not on changes of attitudes, but on communication, social influence and group processes. It is shown that the collection of articles in this issue brings out these diverse approaches in social psychology. Broadly, it encompasses social psychological studies based on the research of attitudes and attitude changes on the one hand, and those based on the studies of influence and communication on the other.

This paper presents its author’s famous distinction between globalization, as the process or vehicle by which ideas, habits and worldviews travel from one culture to another and are transformed in the process, and mundialization, as the taking in of the outside world into our own lifeworlds, a process by which the ideas and customs of other cultures are transported into our homeworlds. In this process, what was once strange and unfamiliar is transformed into something comfortable and familiar. This is the process that is generally known as cultural assimilation, and by virtue of which the boundaries of our individual homeworlds become constantly widened. Examining this phenomenon, which he calls the ‘mundialization of home’, leads the author to sketch the main features of a possible transcultural moral world.

This article reviews and contrasts research findings in a variety of disciplines seeking corroboration for theories of settlement in Madagascar. Evidence is considered from the fields of linguistics, archaeology (studies of pottery), cultural anthropology and genetic analysis, leading to conclusions broadly supporting the thesis of Austronesian migrations directly to Madagascar from Kalimantan and Sulawesi around the 5th and 7th centuries CE, which combined with a Bantu group originating from the region of Mozambique. The article nevertheless warns against attributing too much to individual discipline studies, concluding that only genetic analysis can provide conclusive proof, and this only when informed by prior anthropological and historical indicators.

This paper adopts a comparative approach to analyze the crucial issue of the dynamics between universally shared values and the essentials of different cultures. It presents the ways in which universal values are conceptualized in Western, Indian and Muslim philosophy, presenting not only a historical overview but referring to modern authors such as Daya Krishna, D.P. Chattopadhyaya, Richard Rorty, Muhammad Iqbal, S.H. Nasr and Abdolkarim Soroush to show how these authors implicitly use, or do not use, cultural essential and universal values in their own work. It is eventually claims that comparative philosophy is of crucial importance for the future of philosophical thought in a global world.

This paper claims that what needs reinventing is not democracy as an ideal model, but rather the prevailing reality in terms of a set of obstacles hindering the realization of this model. Democracy can only be adapted to the new realities of the world if these realities are also transformed in such a way as to make it possible for democracy to properly function. The absence of norms on an international scale is manifested by a de facto hegemonic power accruing to certain states. This paper attempts a philosophical description of this situation through the difference between globalization, that tends to reduce all individual difference, and universalization, pluralist as its purposes can only be attained through a rationality of communication. Their respective actors are also different, as well as the different models provided for the evolution of the UN system.

This paper revisits the different notions of influence, persuasion and influencebound subjects. It illustrates and critiques the dominant prevailing concept of influence and its effects, which, though diversely denominated and presented through various theories, always comes down to reaffirming the relationship of dominance and the possibility of the nullification of the subject within the relationship with the other. With this aim, it studies the classical theories of interpersonal influence and brings to attention some of the bodies of information which have been systematically neglected or set aside, particularly concerning suggestion, possession, mesmerism and somnambulism.

This article examines the development of the concept of laicity and its specific application within the French political, social and cultural context. In doing so it contends that, far from being a ‘French exception’ as is sometimes perceived in the media, laicity in France drew on concepts and practices already in place in other countries at the time of the 1905 legislation separating church and state. The article concludes by asserting a distinction between laicity and secularism, whereby the former emphasises the separation of the roles of state and religion within a nation, whereas the latter refers to the progressive loss of relevance of religion within a culture. The specific definition of laicity has been enshrined in a recent International Declaration of Laicity in the 21st Century.

This paper presents a way of building social cohesion open to diversity, assuming that democracy is alive only when it is reinvented. It challenges social trust to welcome diversity, thus allowing for a continual reinvention of democratic cohesion. Articulating cultural diversity and trust represents a major challenge for democratic coexistence. Philosophy is called to take into account the existing models of social cohesion and trust, and to reinvent democracy by defining a new paradigm of trust integrating social and cultural diversity.

The author argues that the persuasive process is articulated within a dynamic linking beliefs and emotions. The different possible states of equilibrium balancing these two aspects define a persuasive process as more inherently rational or more inherently rhetorical. This latter, being marked by an immediate emotional participation, functions within a social context of the community type. It is dominated by an aesthetic form of communication, where epistemic belief proceeds out of a conformist adherence to the ethos of the group. Its extreme form is represented by the discourse of propaganda. Linked to the epistemic structure of the rhetorical discourse there corresponds a moral structure of resentment and an authoritarian social structure. Although rational elements and emotional elements still coexist within concrete discourses, the possibility of distinguishing them in terms of autonomous functionalities represents the specific adjunct brought by philosophical reflection to the determination of the epistemic structure of persuasion.

This paper deals with three guiding principles of contemporary Western civilization. It explores the compatibility of Toleration, Pluralism and Truth, as well as their application to diverse domains of cultural activity and creation. There is no place for toleration, let alone pluralism, in the realm of logic and mathematics. Scientific conclusions allow diverse degrees of certainty. The realm of monotheistic religions excludes pluralism, but necessitates toleration. The domains of ethics and its related social institutions allow diversity in secondary matters, but essentially should be guided by universally valid principles. In the case of aesthetics, a diversity of taste suggests a virtually unlimited pluralism. Yet, a universal basic principle of aesthetic evaluation is suggested which would greatly reduce tolerable pluralism, although this assertion is made with less confidence than the insistence on basic norms in ethics.

In Malta and Southern Italy, legends centred on the prestigious figure of the Sibyl are still known by the older people. In Majorca, the prophetic song attributed to the Greek Sibyl, Erythrea (6th century BC), is still sung on Christmas eve in the monastery-sanctuary of Lluc. This paper focuses on the history of this prophetic song since its adoption by the medieval Church and on its surviving tradition in certain areas of Catalan culture – a fabulous example of cultural continuity.

This paper aims to show that propaganda and persuasion are underlined by two forms of communication, one aiming at a monologue, and the other aiming at a dialogue, which in practice do often coexist, with one or the other prevailing at a particular time. In order to understand propaganda or persuasion, we need to study them as part of the systems (e.g. institutions, organizations, communication) to which they belong, rather than treat them as decontextualized phenomena. Both propaganda and persuasion involve conscious and unconscious communicative processes. Nevertheless, the majority of social psychology experiments still assume that the experimenter should deal with phenomena only at a conscious level. In dialogical communication, however, latent and unconscious thought, inner dialogue, and ‘the depth of consciousness’, are presupposed to be unavoidable aspects of communication, whether it is concerned with influence processes, persuasion or social representations. They all are established through cultural-historical processes and determine symbolic meanings of social communication of the present and future.

Medical sciences have developed in India from time immemorial. This paper presents a detailed outlook of the development of these techniques in medieval India and Indo-Central Asia. The different authors, works and techniques of that time are recalled and compared in order to provide an overall view of this barely known tradition.

Is, or has, democracy a universal value? This is the main question raised by this paper, which distinguishes between two aspects of democracy: political institution in opposition to despotism, and political belief against any kind of slavery and subordination. The role played by intellectuals in the development of contemporary democracy, and the relation of democracy to mass culture and the influence of mass media on a true democratic attitude, are studied within the frame of an overall ‘mass aesthetization' which characterizes contemporary societies.

This article considers the origins of alphabetic writing, tracing its probable source to ancient Egypt, southern Levant or the Sinai during the Egyptian Middle Kingdom (17th century BCE). It supports the view that the earliest scripts were acrophonic representations of a West-Semitic language, whose use developed under the rule of the Hyksos in Egypt but was arrested there with the expulsion of this foreign dynasty at the end of the 16th century BCE. The development is then traced through the Levant, with particular attention given to the emergence of cuneiform alphabetic scripts in Ugarit (c. 1300 BCE). This form of writing disappeared with the fall of Ugarit, but linear alphabetic scripts were preserved in a variety of Near-Eastern languages, notably Aramaic and Phoenician. These two languages, by becoming linguae francae respectively of the Syria-northern Mesopotamia and the Anatolia-Eastern Mediterranean regions, brought about the spread of alphabetic writing up until the 8th century BCE. The article concludes by examining the influence of the Phoenician script on Greek, Etruscan and ultimately Latin forms of writing.

This contribution intends to examine the role of democracy in the evolution of international law, and equally the role of the latter in the advancement of democracy, or, one might say, in its ‘reinvention'. Two aspects of this broad theme are addressed: the influence of processes of democratization at the level of the individual nation on the evolution of international law, and the extent of penetration of democracy and democratic mechanisms within the processes of creation and application of international law. A rich record of examples drawn by international jurisprudence is used to illustrate these complementary processes.

In this article, the authors review a contemporary social psychological perspective on persuasion with an emphasis on explicating the psychological processes that underlie successful attitude change. Those mechanisms by which variables in the persuasion setting can influence attitude change are: (a) affect the amount of information processing; (b) bias the thoughts that are generated or (c) one's confidence in those thoughts (or other structural features); (d) serve as persuasive arguments or evidence or (e) affect attitudes by serving as simple cues and heuristics. By grouping the persuasion processes into meaningful categories, the authors aim to provide a useful guide to organize and facilitate access to key findings in this literature. They also describe a theoretical framework to understand the circumstances for which the different processes are more likely to influence our judgments, such as when variables precede or follow thought-generation, and when the extent of thinking is relatively low, medium, or high.

The very diversity of cultures impels the economist to respect a principle of modesty when it comes to specifying the degree of universality to which the science of economics can lay claim. In considering this issue, this paper: a) criticizes the ambition of certain forms of economic thought to arrive at truths which are universal, and b) explores the modes by which contemporary economic science participates in a renewed pursuit of a universalist doctrine. It concludes that the logic of economic rationality implies a representation of the world that is incompatible with the diversity of cultures. At the same time, such diversity should not be raised to the status of absolutes. Combining difference and unity is a major challenge for current economics.