SUSAN HAACK
399
to counter-culturalism, as I shall say. The first shift was already accom–
modated in my original fourfold distinction; accommodating the second
shift gives us eight distinguishable positions; for example, besides philo–
sophical multiculturalism,
philosophical counter-culturalism.
In principle,
that is: in practice it is often far from clear which of these is being pro–
posed.
It
is part of the particularists' strategy to blur the distinction be–
tween their position and the pluralists', and it is part of the counter-cul–
turalists' strategy to blur the differences between their use of "Western
culture" and more ordinary uses. Bernstein's word is certainly a good
one for this conceptually slippery situation.
I mention social multiculturalism only to put it aside. It raises hard
questions, even in the practically and morally more straightforward cases
where social multiculturalism is not the result of conquest or a territorial
decision imposed from outside, but of immigration: that Muslim girls in
British schools should not be obliged to wear gym uniforms which are,
by their standards, immodest, is easy enough, but it is very far from obvi–
ous that the same tolerance should extend to, say, recognition of polyg–
amous marriages, or to banning
The Satanic Verses.
But such social and
political questions fall outside the scope of this essay.
The claim of pluralistic educational multiculturalism is true. It
is
de–
sirable for people to know about other cultures than their own. (As I
write this sentence, though, newly struck by that deceptively straightfor–
ward-sounding phrase, "their own," I am reminded of Dewey's observa–
tion that "the typical American is himself . . . international and interra–
cial in his makeup .") Pluralistic educational multiculturalism is desirable ,
but it is not easily achieved - a more-than-superficial knowledge of an–
other culture is likely to require some fluency in another language; and it
is not easily combined with ensuring that students acquire the other
knowledge and skills they will need. Still, awareness that others do things
differently and take different beliefs for granted helps one to discriminate
the conventional from the non- conventional in one's own practice and
thinking, to avoid the "rightly are they called 'pigs' " syndrome. And
yes, knowledge of the customs of minority communities within a
multicultural society can, surely, contribute to the accomplishment of a
mutually tolerable, or, with good luck and good will, a mutually en–
riching,
modus vivendi.
The claim of particularistic educational multiculturalism is false, and
for some of the same reasons that pluralistic educational multiculturalism
is true (and, for some of the same reasons that pluralistic educational
multiculturalism is likely to contribute to mutual tolerance, particularistic
educational multiculturalism runs the risk of contributing to mutual
in-
