Humiliation and human rights in diverse societies: Forgiveness and other solutions from cross-cultural research

Abstract

Living in a multiculturalNational Academy of Psychology (NAOP) India Psychological Studies (March 2010) 55(1):35 -45 Researchers have consistently identifi ed the three domains of cognition, affect and behavior (Triandis, 1977;Brislin, 1989;Landis & Bhawuk, 2004;Bhawuk, Landis & Lo, 2006;Bhawuk, 2009) that need to be addressed in intercultural training programs to prepare people to be effective in intercultural interactions. However, not much exists in the literature that addresses the affective issues faced by sojourners. In the acculturation literature there is more research on acculturative stress that captures the affective issues faced by immigrants (Berry, 2004) and refugees (Fangen, 2006); however, they are often presented as the plight of people facing marginalization, and others are assumed to be following the cultural learning paradigm of acculturation (Berry, 2004). An attempt is made to fi ll this lacuna in the literature by presenting positive and negative experiences of a successful immigrant and sojourner.Another critical topic that is neglected in both intercultural training and acculturation literature pertains to the notion of humiliation (Hartling & Luchetta, 1999; 1 Paper presented at the 3rd Annual Meeting on Human Dignity and Humiliation Studies, September 16-18, 2004

Minimizing Bias and Maximizing the Potential Strengths of Autoethnography as a Narrative Research

“…Meanwhile, Bhawuk (2010) wrote of his personal experience of being discriminated against in the university where he worked. On one hand, higher education provided him with positive experiences about multicultural society, respect, and positive life achievements.…”

Śraddhā: Construct Definition from the Bhagavad-Gītā

“…I have also developed models of self (Bhawuk, 2005(Bhawuk, , 2008a(Bhawuk, , 2011, models of personal harmony (Bhawuk, 1999(Bhawuk, , 2011) and a spirituality-based theory of creativity (Bhawuk, 2003(Bhawuk, , 2019d. This effort has led to the employment of various methods including historical analysis (Bhawuk, 2003), case analysis (Bhawuk, 2003;Bhawuk, Mrazek, & Munusamy, 2009), autoethnography (Bhawuk, 2009(Bhawuk, , 2017b(Bhawuk, , 2018(Bhawuk, , 2019c, lexical analysis (Bhawuk, 2017a(Bhawuk, , 2019a(Bhawuk, , 2019b, literary analysis (Bhawuk, 2017a), bridging life-world and scientific world (Bhawuk, 2019d), building models from scriptures (Bhawuk, 2005(Bhawuk, , 2008(Bhawuk, , 2010a(Bhawuk, , 2010b(Bhawuk, , 2011(Bhawuk, , 2019d and employing other texts like the writing of Kabīr Sāhab (Bhawuk, in press). In this article, I add to the list of Indian constructs by deriving the meaning of the construct of śraddhā from the Bhagavad-Gītā.…”