Model of Cultural Imperatives

Resolving conflict is one of the worldwide social problems I have my mind on, under the umbrella of Algorithms for Philanthropy.  This is not a new thing for me.  More than a decade ago, I came up with a set of ideas and suggestions for dealing with conflict and ultimately eradicating it, which I called Model of Cultural Imperatives.

My focus was not necessarily on differences between people, say, in the workplace, but conflict within a country and between countries.  One glance at the news, and we cannot help but face aggression and violence:  Ukraine, Syria, Iraq and Palestine.  These are just hotbeds in Europe and Middle East that dominate the news, but scores of others cause fear, destruction and death.

The broad causes are also not that much of secret:  religious differences, government tyranny, economic disparity.  Something fuels conflict, and perhaps like a nuclear chain reaction it begets more and more conflict, as tempers flare, fighting escalates, and battles spread like an untrammeled contagion.

Model of Cultural Imperatives is an attempt to get to the root of conflict, and pluck it out like so much rank weed, and to do so better than we have to date.  The essence of The Core Algorithm is to grasp a situation sufficiently enough, in order to resolve it effectively.  Kudos to the academicians who have lent theory, research and findings to the whole bailiwick of conflict.  Bless the officials and humanitarians who have put their feet in those hotbeds to stop and control conflict. 

The cultural imperatives are group needs that must be acknowledged, appreciated and understood, then satisfied in one form or another:

Sameness

(image credit)

In my first year of graduate school, I remember interviewing a fellow student for a course project.  She was Jewish, and she eschewed the belief that just because two people were also Jewish, they had an immediate friendship.  She questioned, in the other words, the imperative of sameness.  True, we as a society must work at tolerating, accepting, and relating with those from different cultural groups.  But I argue that before this can happen, there has to be a common ground among them: which may be religious, ethnic, gender or interest.

Identity

(image credit)

As a corollary to the first, the imperative of identity means that whether we like it or not, in-group vs out-group is a real human phenomenon.  Psychologically identity is a set of parameters, including physical ones, that define who we are as persons.  Groups have a related set of boundaries, characteristics and values, which define who their members are.  At the same time, groups also delineate those who don't belong.  In other words, inclusion criteria are de facto exclusion criteria, too. 

Safety

(image credit)

It may be physical, emotional and interpersonal, but safety is another cultural imperative.  Life preservation is fundamental to people and groups.  We may be quick to label someone as defensive or resistant, when he or she doesn't quite follow along.  Worse, we may judge groups as combative, and even dismiss them as ignorant or uncouth, when they fight against us in one form or another.  But the very fact that we are an out-group to them positions us, rightly or wrongly, as threats to their well-being.  Sure, we can fight in response, and thereby escalate the conflict, and ultimately push for a win-lose outcome.

Simplicity

(image credit)

I spoke to a fellow alumni a couple of years ago, and we were on the subject of Asian-American minorities.  I argued that our broad characterizations of what this ethnic group was about had to do with our limit cognitive capacity.  Humankind may indeed be an intelligent specie on earth, but on average our ability to truly grasp things, connect the dots, and see the bigger picture is modest at best and suspect at worst.  It was more economical mentally to see Asian-Americans, rightly or wrongly, as demure, unassertive, and polite.  The alternative, as some people may see it, isn't so practical:  that is, to get to know them person-by-person.  Simplicity is a practical need and measure for us.  But isn't this the stuff of prejudice and discrimination?