Camilla Pagani

In the last few years there has been a growing tendency on the part of some social sciences researchers to adopt a broad definition of diversity (including, for instance, not only cultural values, but also gender, age, socio-economic status, and sexual orientation) and to use this term as a synonym of “the other”, the non-ego. This fact has been particularly helpful both from an epistemological and an educational point of view. The relationship with diversity is a basic and continuous aspect of human experience, as the self develops through its relations with others. Thus, the meaning and the “management” of diversity are closely associated with issues like social cohesion, social and political conflict, and social/educational interventions aiming to foster social cohesion. A positive and real social cohesion in an ingroup rests on the acknowledgment of and the dialogue with the diversities of the various members of the ingroup itself, which inevitably results in the ingroup members’ becoming familiar with and getting used to diversity in general. This means that diversity relating to the outgroup and to the various members of the outgroup is understood and accepted, given that diversity among the members of the ingroup is also understood and accepted. This way, cross-cultural relations within an ingroup and between the ingroup and the outgroups are fostered. That is to say, social cohesion within the ingroup is automatically extended * This paper is one of the outcomes of a study conducted within the “Progetto Migrazioni” Department of Cultural Identity, Italian National Research Council.