Communication as a Reminder ofNon-Separateness
The first Asiacentric proposition is that communication is aprocess in which we remind ourselves of the interdependence andinterrelatedness of the universe. This proposition cancomplement the Western dominant thinking that communication is aprocess in which we demonstrate our independence and express ourindividuality. The two Asian themes of relationality andcircularity have much to do with the ontological belief that theuniverse is a great whole in which everyone and everything areinterrelated across space and time. No one and nothing in theuniverse exists in isolation (Chen, 2006; Jung, 2009; Miike,2003a). Asian religions and philosophies illuminate theinterpenetrated nature of the self, family, community, society,nation, world, and cosmos.
Confucius (551–479 BCE) remarks in the Analects (6: 30)that “if you wish to establish yourself, you have to help others toestablish themselves; if you wish to complete yourself, you have tohelp others to complete themselves.” Similarly, in the words ofSuzuki (2006), Buddhism teaches: “So to save oneself we have tosave others. . . . By helping others, I may be able to save myself.My salvation and others’ salvation are so intimately involved,connected together, that we can never save ourselves just byourselves. We must always be saved together” (p. 19). Moreinterestingly, the Hindu notion of Virat Purusha [CosmicPerson] views each individual as the manifestation of the cosmositself. The universe is “a single body where each element lives forall and all live for one . . . [T]he weal and woe of one individualaffect another” (Saral, 1983, p. 54). It is the teaching ofHinduism that “the world of distinct and separate objects andprocesses is a manifestation of a more fundamental reality that isundivided and unconditioned” (Jain, 1991, p. 80).
The Asian worldview demands that we constantly communicate withfellow humans, nature, and the world of spirits in order to escapefrom the illusion that we are independent individuals in aparticular place at a particular time (Miike, 2007). For humans areprone to engage in a present-oriented and lifeworld-centered way ofthinking. It comes as no surprise, then, that Asian patterns ofsmall group and organizational communication correspond especiallyto this ideal of communication as a reminder of . . .non-separateness with a view to strengthening group ororganizational unity, loyalty, and harmony. The Indonesianmusyawarah-mufakat performance and the Japanesenemawashi practice, for instance, allow group members notonly to exchange ideas but also to increase the sense ofinterdependence and interrelatedness (Saito, 1982).
The Asian worldview essentially defines communication as anendless process in which we continuously locate and relocateourselves in an ever- expanding network of relationships acrossspace and time. This ancient yet radical Eastern idea ofcommunication must be taken seriously now that the global villagehas never been so divided by wealth, power, technology, andinfluence in world history, and [now] that we have polluted the airwe breathe and poisoned the water we drink to the extent that werisk our own lives (Tu, 1998, 2002). Social disintegration is alsobecoming a worldwide phenomenon in modern societies. As Asante(2005) observes, “The lack of connectedness creates insensitivityto others, harshness, abrasiveness, and arrogance” (p. 135). Yum(2000) further points out that “[a]lthough individual- ism has itsown strength as a value, individualism that is not accompanied bycommitments to large entities eventually forces people into a stateof isolation, where life itself becomes meaningless” (p. 71). Wemust learn about communication as a way to realize that ourwell-being is inextricably and inescapably intertwined with [thewell-being] of other members of the human family, nature, and eventhe supernatural.
What are some ways that a culture’s worldview couldinfluence communication style? How could these create difficultiesduring an intercultural communication interaction?
