Interculturalism: Postmulticultural discourse of social integration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the current postmulticultural debates, interculturalism is a model of integration in the contexts of diversity, a way to conceptualize global social-cultural reality, and an intercultural dialogue or an instrument of ‘positive interaction’. The Council of Europe, European Commission and UNESCO consider interculturalism a main model of social integration in the contexts of diversity. Interculturalism takes into account the multiplicity of identities, differences and modes of coexistence inherent in the era of ‘super-diversity’, and mobility diversification under globalization. In the postmulticultural perspective, interculturalism is a part of the debates on ‘the end of multiculturalism’ that has lost its symbolic capital. Interculturalism develops a new narrative of social integration based on rethinking of ideas and social situations, shifting contexts and symbolic inversions, thus, becoming relevant to the social and cultural reality of the 21st century. However, interculturalism does not replace multiculturalism as the third strategy of integration beyond multiculturalism and assimilation for it implies various integration models such as Quebec interculturalism and European interculturalism with the revived idea of the nation state. Interculturalism focuses on creating ‘a formula for coexistence’ under super-diversity, and is not limited to the immigration context; it emphasizes the multidimensionality of differences (professional, gender, ethnic) in the context of inequality including the nation state. Theoretical heterogeneity and thematic diversity of interculturalism and the ambivalence of its concepts can determine new challenges for the national and international structures that rely on it. Interculturalism considers management of cultural diversity and development of intercultural dialogue as functions of not only government structures, but also of other segments of society such as educational and civil society institutions, private sector and local communities.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".