Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

One effect of globalization is an increase in the frequency of interaction among diverse individuals, organizations, societies, and cultures and, with it, greater potential for friction, tension, and even conflict. To counteract or, better yet, stave off the potential for differences to escalate into violent conflict or disengagement, a set of norms and behaviors well beyond simple acts of courtesy (i.e., civility) should govern these interactions. Identifying these norms and behaviors and understanding the meaning and functions of civility are thus key tasks for global studies.

The term civility has a long and impressive history in the social sciences and the humanities that reflects different uses and changes in meaning over time. Like many complex concepts, civility can easily become normatively charged and used for different ideological purposes. Differences in perspectives on what some view as a much needed normative foundation and others interpret as a moral bias are at the core of the emerging debate about the meaning, role, or function of civility in societies facing globalization processes.

Definition

Nicole Billante and Peter Saunders identified three elements that together constitute civility. The first is respect for others, or as Edward Shils elaborated, respect for the dignity of and the desire for dignity of others. This diverges with the conceptualization of respect as obedience, given that one can be disobedient while remaining respectful. A second element is civility as public behavior toward strangers. Neither love nor hate is needed in order to be civil toward others in everyday life. Here, the notion of privacy and personhood are reflected in the treatment of the other as a fellow human regardless of status. Finally, the third element refers to self-regulation in the sense that civility requires putting one's own immediate self-interest in the context of the larger common good and acting accordingly. Civility is an attitude that expresses readiness to moderate particular, individual, or parochial interests and a mode of action that attempts to strike a balance between conflicting interests and conflicting demands. As Paul Dekker points out, it is required when agreement cannot be reached and people must continue to coexist despite their conflicting interests and views of the common good.

Along similar lines, Adam McClellan emphasized three criteria that must be met in a relationship for there to exist a mood of civility: The individual actors acknowledge their own and the others’ humanity, recognize their mutual interdependence, and are capable of finding—if needed or wanted—common cause. Following this line of thought, civility, as Christopher Bryant formulates it, does not require us to like those whom we deal with civilly, and as such it contrasts strongly with the warmth of communal, religious, or national enthusiasms.

Civility is learned behavior, embedded in the social and cultural codes of society, and it requires positive reinforcement. Like social capital, in particular interpersonal and institutional trust, civility requires acknowledgment and maintenance in actual social life. It can be learned as well as unlearned, and it can increase and decrease over time. There is a valid risk of forgetting that learned behavior and socialization processes will be challenged in the event of a drastically changed environment, where personal security is threatened. A drastically changed societal structure would be followed by changed human attitudes and behavior.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading