Abstract
The discussion on geocultural theory has underscored the urgency for us to re-examine the way cultural differences are handled in academic discourse. Boundaries need to be drawn, because European universality neglects cultural and also paradigm differences. This article argues that as locking universality and particularity in a dualist paradigm is part of the problem, drawing boundaries to concepts and theories will lead to further problems. Borrowing from the Chinese yin/yang dynamic worldview and the Kuhnian notion of incommensurability, the author proposes a methodological framework in which commensurability, rather than universality, is the major concern. The commensurability model and the universality model are compared with examples to illustrate how the former may help advance theory development from a local perspective.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
