Reconciliation and the Search for a Shared Moral Landscape: An Exploration Based upon a Study of Northern Ireland and South Africa
Reconciliation and the Search for a Shared Moral Landscape: An Exploration Based upon a Study of Northern Ireland and South Africa
复制标题
和解与共同道德景观的探索：基于北爱尔兰和南非研究的探索
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2001
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Maria Ericson
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Maria Ericson
在北爱尔兰和南非，和解的障碍存在于“道德景观”的这些要素中： – 创伤、分离和不平等的经历， – 对冲突和“他者”的不同看法， – 对立的认同和忠诚， – 互动规范， – 竞争者对“和平”和“正义”等价值观的解释。本研究描述了如何解决这些障碍：1）努力，特别是普世团体，努力弥合北爱尔兰的天主教/新教分歧。 2) 南非真相与和解委员会的工作和辩论。基于这些逆境中的对话，本研究提出了“解放性对话”的一些先决条件——这是寻求全球伦理的一个核心问题。
北爱尔兰的普世主义团体追求联合主义和民族主义之间的中间道路，关注天主教徒和新教徒之间的关系，并强调他们的共同责任。在南非，人们更加强调个人受害者和肇事者之间的关系、某一群体（即白人）悔改的责任以及作为和解一部分的重新分配和物质赔偿。这两种情况下的和解倡议都强调对话、宽容和非暴力。他们的灵感来自于每个人都是按照上帝的形象创造的观念以及所有人对上帝的最高忠诚。特别注重“故事分享”，即分享冲突中的个人经历，而不是争论各种观点。能够同时说话和倾听“对方”的先决条件是：安全；权力平等；承认“他人”的人性和自己的人类尊严；做好批判性自我检查的准备；关心对手的福利，参与者对自己的身份获得了安全感，并从自己的创伤中得到了一些治愈。对彼此的承诺和共同的居住地可以作为共同点的基础，类似的创伤经历、为人父母的经历和（在北爱尔兰）社会阶层的经历也可以作为共同点的基础。确定了某些困境，例如需要优先考虑什么安全，在官方话语中要强调什么故事，以及寻求和谐与努力改变不平等。
In Northern Ireland and South Africa obstacles to reconciliation were found in these elements of a “moral landscape”: – Experiences of trauma, separation and inequalities, – Divergent views of the conflict and of “the other”, – Opposing identifications and loyalties, – Norms for interaction, – Contestant interpretations of values such as “peace” and “justice”. This study describes how these obstacles have been addressed in: 1) Efforts, particularly by ecumenical groups, to bridge the Catholic/Protestant divide in Northern Ireland. 2) The work of, and debates surrounding, the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission. On the basis of these dialogues in adverse circumstances, this study suggests some prerequisites for “emancipatory conversations” – a central question in the search for a global ethics.
Ecumenical groups in Northern Ireland pursued a middle road between Unionism and Nationalism, focused on relationships between Catholics and Protestants, and stressed their shared responsibility. In South Africa there was more stress on the relationship between individual victims and perpetrators, on the responsibility of one group (i.e. whites) to repent, and on redistribution and material reparations as part of reconciliation. Initiatives for reconciliation in both contexts stressed dialogue, tolerance and non-violence. They were inspired by the notion of every person being created in God’s image and by a supreme loyalty to the God of all people. Particular attention was given to “storysharing”, i.e. the sharing of personal experiences of the conflict, rather than debating various viewpoints. Prerequisites for being able both to speak and to listen to “the other side” were: safety; equality of power; recognition of the humanity of “the other” and of one’s own human dignity; preparedness for critical self-examination; concern with one’s adversary’s welfare, and that the participants had achieved a sense of security in their own identities and some healing from their own traumas. A commitment to each other and the shared place of residence could serve as a basis for common ground, as could similar experiences of trauma, of parenthood, and (in Northern Ireland) of social class. Certain dilemmas were identified, such as what safety needs to prioritise, what stories to emphasise in the official discourse, and seeking harmony versus struggling to change inequalities.