[MUSIC] So earlier you heard about bricolage and the coming together with difference, difference of skill sets, difference of discipline, difference of ideas and perspectives. Bricolage is typically thinking about boundaries that are being crossed by people who are comfortable spanning boundaries through some personal courage. Now, the way we traditionally think about spanning boundaries is normally through a cultural lens. We all have cultural markers which differ. The most obvious ones are around, for instance, the way in which we converse. Some conversations are quite open, typically, one sees that in Latin America. Some conversations are quite convoluted, one sees that in China, the UK, and some conversations are quite direct, one sees that typically in Denmark, Holland, Germany. Those are the ones well-understood, but there are other dimensions of boundaries which are culturally based. For instance, space is very different and thought about differently and practiced differently around the world. Some people's personal space are quite narrow. For instance, the English, one cannot get too close to someone without getting into their personal space. When one travels, for instance, to Latin America, one might see much closer space levels. You probably see someone hugging someone else or holding their arm around their neck while being 10 or 20 centimeters from the other person's mouth. One sees the holding of hands, typically in Africa and all the way through Middle East, mainly by men holding other men's hands. So the notion of space differs, and when one deals with difference, you gotta be quiet cognizant of these different spaces. There's also the notion of time, for instance. In a typical western Anglo-Saxon view of time, we think of time as present moving forward towards the future, and there's nothing we can do about the past. However, when working with Japanese, one notices that they often take time out to consult the ancestors, much like what is done in Central and Southern Africa. There, they're looking for insights that can assist the future going forward. In India and part of Central Asia, one hears of circular time when people don't think of time as in one continuum, but that actually, we would be coming back for more and more takes of time. So when working across these boundaries, one is being cognizant of these various approaches. Whether it's time, whether it's the way we converse, whether it's other social norms like the way in which we write, we think, these are all differences, and they are typical of a cultural lens. However, difference is thought about a lot more broadly through the theoretical lens. There are three main pillars for thinking about difference. The first is through a sociological lens. This particular view, punted by sociologists, looks at difference as a problem. A problem in the sense that most of us spend most of our life spending our time differentiating ourselves from other people by doing things that brings us both social and economic power. For instance, if I get more qualifications than someone else, I expect an accrual of greater social and economic benefits, the way in which I dress, the car I drive, where I live, the location in which I find myself, the friends I hang out with. Sociologists argue that we spend all of our life creating these differences so as to gain an economic and social benefit. However, if we are to engage difference on an equal footing, one almost has to go against the very notions of this differentiated difference, because I have to see you as an equal, someone with a credible view, someone with a credible perspective. Therefore, sociologists argue that we will not do this naturally. So you have to use law, processes, rules to engage that. In countries like South Africa, we see affirmative action which is a copy of what has happened in Malaysia, Ireland, New Zealand, Canada, and in the 50s, the US who used similar sociological rules to try and drive equality in the engagement of difference. Psychologists though, the second pillar, have a very different view of difference. They see difference as something deeply personal. The argument is that we, through our lifetimes, have suppressed or oppressed parts of ourselves in order to be more socially acceptable. There are part of ourselves which are not okay in certain social settings. The argument they put forward is that those bits of ourself don't go away when we suppress or oppress it. It goes into our subconscious or our unconscious, and it becomes a part of what is known as our shadow self. Therefore, to engage difference, we need to bring forward in a constructive way some of these differences in order to make ourselves a lot more whole as human beings so that we can display mature vulnerability when engaging difference. Therefore, psychologists argue that our differences, our engagement of those come from deep, personal work, self-awareness, understanding projection and transference, reflection on our part and so on. The third lens for thinking about difference and diversity is one rooted in spiritual traditions. Here, we think of a greater being, God, the One. In this particular lens on diversity, the arguments are that the focus should be away from the law, should be away from processes, equally away from personal psychological change, and that the focus should be on something or someone greater than ourselves. So the opportunity to do stuff with difference is so that we can seek out the common good, we can strive for higher purposes. We can serve our values in congruent ways that serve something, a cause, a community, a God that is much greater than ourselves. These are the three main theoretical lenses through which to look at difference. [MUSIC]
