One of the general objectives of intercultural education is to contribute to the valorisation of both the universal aspect of human nature – as is expressed in the Declaration of Human Rights - and the particularity of cultures, in order to overcome prejudice and promote cultural diversity (UNESCO 2006). This balance between universal and particular, however, is implicitly precarious: as was pointed out by the anthropologist Gerd Baumann in "The multicultural riddle", multiple drives are at play in the multicultural society, at times claiming universal rights and, at others, those of a specific group. In the school context, the greatest constraint of intercultural education practice is the risk of falling into a culturalist representation of cultures, where, by trying to valorise both the universality of human beings and the diversity of cultures, the latter is often predominant. The result is often excessive emphasis on the differences between cultures, while the cultures themselves are unintentionally represented as separate from each other. Such risks can indeed be explained in terms of diversity belonging to the paradigm of difference.

The aim of the paper is to point out that the exploration of similarities among cultures, instead, reveals that cultures are not rigidly separate entities, but include overlapping areas, spaces in-between that make boundaries blurred (Bhatti and Kimmich, 2018).  There are many concrete elements of cultures showing similarities between each another, such as handcrafts, bread baking, folk tales, or play practices. The latter, for example, enable us to emphasise the universality of the experience of play, while also highlighting the huge variety of games, expression of cultural diversities. In other words, they attain a representation of cultures that attest to unity through diversity. To recall a metaphor by Wittgenstein – who referred to games as examples for his concept of family resemblances - games represent “the fibres” that “run through the whole thread” holding together the experience of play of children and adults in the world (Wittgenstein, 1968).

In the effort to answer the research question of how to foster cultural diversity, the study resulted in the emergence of a model for the intercultural encounter suggesting that the emergence of similarities should occur in an initial moment, prior to and indispensable for the appreciation of diversities (Berti 2023). This claim is substantiated by the fact that the search for similarity involves a necessary attitude towards exploring relationships among two or more objects. In turn, it is in the discovery of these relationships that nearness emerges (Bhatti and Kimmich, 2018). Still, to look at relationships and not so much at objects themselves is a method of inquiry that requires change at an epistemological level (Bateson, 1979). In this context, a turn in intercultural education towards the exploration of cultural education practices based on similarity is seen here as a necessary shift to enhance the appreciation of cultural diversity and support intercultural dialogue.  

In order to understand the field of intercultural education on an European perspective, the study has analysed Italian, German and English research of the last 15 years (Grant and Portera, 2011; Nigris, 2015, Aguado Odina and Del Olmo, 2009; Gundara, 2015; Banks, 2009; Prengel, 2006; Krüger-Potratz, 2018; Gogolin et al., 2018; Mecheril et al., 2010; among others). The qualitative study has included the review of national, EU and UNESCO guidelines, sheding light on numerous references relating to the difficulty of translating theory and policies into the daily practice of multicultural schools and on the dearth of research into best practice (Gorski, 2008). Particularly, the persistence of the dominance of the paradigm of difference and the risk of the discourse on cultural diversity slipping into it, has emerged from the analysis of contemporary research on development of the field in Germany over the past fifty years - from the early sixties, the time of guest works (Gastarbeites), until present (Gogolin et al., 2018). By exploring the concept of culture and the processes of Othering from an anthropological point of view, I then came across several cultural turns (Bachmann-Medick, 2016) and the contribution of postcolonial studies towards the similarity approach (Bhabba, 1994). By stressing the potential of similarity, therefore, I align myself to the interpretation given by cultural studies scholars, as underlined by Anil Bhatti and Dorothee Kimmich’s Similarity – A paradigm for culture theory (2018). The approach represents more than a change of perspective, as it implies a shift of paradigm, from difference to similarity. This shift is anything but simple, as to think in terms of difference - identifying categories and elements of distinctions - is a functional method of modern science, and it has therefore structured the way not only science but also how the whole of western thought is constructed: this is how knowledge has been produced and transferred from the 17th Century onwards when, first the English philosopher, Francis Bacon, and later the French philosopher and mathematician, René Descartes, began to criticise similarity as a fundamental experience and a form of knowledge: they denounced it as a confusing tangle that needed instead to be analysed in terms of measure and order (Foucault, 1971). Similarity was not totally abandoned, but it was no longer analysed in terms of unity and relationship of equality or inequality, but in terms of identity and differences.

The paper identifies the primary constraints of intercultural education as being the tension generated by the attempt to accommodate both universalism and cultural pluralism giving value to the aspect of the universality of human beings alongside the valorisation of their cultural diversity (UNESCO, 2006). This tension is unresolvable, as, in intercultural education practice, the weight given to the aspect of cultural diversity is often more pervasive (Gorski, 2008). Such an imbalance leads to the paradox that differences - primarily defined in terms of nationality, ethnicity and religion (Baumann, 1999) - tend to be emphasised even more, stressing, for example, the origin of pupils with a migrant background, or making them a target group (Gogolin et al., 2018). In intercultural education, a focus on similarity would allow for a shift of attention away from cultural elements of nation, ethnicity and religion to resemblances and intersections amongst cultures. This shift helps us to overcome boundaries because the objects previously considered as separate can now be discovered as no longer so different from one another, or even almost the same (Fastgleichheit) (Bhatti, 2014). This approach does not reject the acknowledgment of cultural diversity rather, it suggests considering it alongside another category. The result is that, by questioning the rigid separation of cultures, the search for overlapping fields of similarity temporarily diverts attention away from stressing dichotomies or boundaries. As was explained by Bhatti, this perspective would now emphasise the principle of “this...as well as that, instead of either–or”, opening up diverse and new ways to deal with the problems of complex societies as opposed to using methodologies focusing on differences (Ibid.). The exploration of similarities among cultures, thus, would help us to overcome cultural boundaries, reduce processes of othering, and facilitate dialogue.

Aguado Odina, T. and Del Olmo, M. (Eds.) (2009). Intercultural education: perspectives and proposals. Madrid: Del Olmo Pintado. Bachmann-Medick, D. (2016). Cultural Turns: New Orientation in the Study of Culture, Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter. Banks, J. A. (2009). The Routledge International Companion to Multicultural Education. New York: Routledge. Bateson, G. (1979). Mind and nature. A necessary unity, New York: E.P. Dutton. Baumann, G. (1999). The Multicultural Riddle. Rethinking National, Ethnic and Religious Identities. New York and London: Routledge. Berti, F. (2023). The Shared Space of Play. Traditional Games as a Tool of Intercultural Education. Zürich: Lit Verlag (In print). Berti, F. (2023). Il filo che lega il gioco nel mondo. Didattica ludica, narrazione e incontro interculturale. Zeitschrift für Interkulturellen Fremdsprachenunterricht. (In print). Bhabha, H. (1994). The location of culture. New York and London: Routledge. Bhatti A. and Kimmich D. (Eds.). (2018). Similarity. A Paradigm for Cultural Theory, New Delhi: Tulika Books. Bhatti, A. (2014). ‘Cultural Similarity Does Not Mean that We Wear the Same Shirts’: Similarity and Difference in Culture and Cultural Theory. Interview with Anil Bhatti. Word and Text. A Journal of Literary Studies and Linguistics, Vol. IV, Issue 2, pp. 13-23. Foucault, M. (1971) [1966]. The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences. New York: Pantheon Books. Gogolin, I., Georgi, V. B., Krüger-Potratz, M., Lengyel, D. and Sandfuchs, U. (Eds.) (2018). Handbuch Interkulturelle Pädagogik. Bad Heilbrunn: Verlag Julius Klinkhardt. Gorski, P. C. (2008). Good Intentions are not enough: A Decolonizing Intercultural Education. Intercultural Education, Vol. 19, N. 6, pp. 515-525. Gundara, J. (2015). The Case for Intercultural Education in a Multicultural World. Oakville: Mosaic press. Mecheril, P., Castro Varela, M. d. M., Dirim, I., Kalpaka, A., & Melter, C. (2010). Migrationspädagogik. Weinheim, Basel: Beltz. Nigris, E. (Ed.) (2015). Pedagogia e didattica interculturale. Culture, contesti, linguaggi. Milano: Pearson Mondadori. Portera, A. and Grant, C. A. (Eds.) (2011). Intercultural and Multicultural Education. Enhancing Global Interconnectedness. New York: Routledge. Prengel, A. (2006). Pädagogik der Vielfalt. Verschiedenheit und Gleichberechtigung in Interkultureller, Feministischer und Integrativer Pädagogik. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Portera A. (2013). Manuale di pedagogia interculturale. Risposte educative nella società globale. Roma: Laterza. UNESCO (2006). UNESCO guidelines for intercultural education. Available at: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000147878 Wittgenstein, L. (1968) [1953]. Philosophical Investigations. Translated by G. E. M. Anscombe. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.