Multicultural Society and Intercultural Citizens

Abstract

The European Union is a diverse community with 27 member states and 24 official languages. Obviously, with such cultural diversity, the European Union should solve wisely for reconciliation. As a solution, the European Union is putting forward an intercultural policy based on interculturalism. This is a matter directly related to the solidarity of the community, which is requested in the process of the European Union integration, and its policy efforts cannot but be important. As a practical alternative to this, the European Union is making a policy of intercultural learning together with the Council of Europe. This chapter intends to examine interculturalism adopted as a philosophy along with the understanding of the intercultural learning policy proposed by the European Union as a policy alternative to cultural diversity. First, I examine the policy changes in Europe’s unique multicultural society. Second, I analyze the key differences between multiculturalism and interculturalism. In addition, I explore cultural intelligence, which is emerging as an intercultural competence. I also refer to the citizens with high intercultural competence such as cultural intelligence as intercultural citizens.

1. Introduction

According to cultural anthropologist Edward Hall, the ultimate goal of studying and understanding other cultures is to understand oneself [1]. Understanding a completely different exotic culture is the same as understanding one’s own culture. In culture, there are more hidden things than visible things; however, people who actually live in a culture are unaware of the things that are hidden and not revealed in their culture. Therefore, the new awareness and vitality gained by projecting oneself into an unfamiliar culture can lead to interest and understanding of one’s life. This is because there emerge “thinking” about the things that are unconsciously taken for granted, the automatic repetition of patterning, and the cultural habits that are inadvertently performed.

This “thinking” is emerging as a new competence and being developed is intercultural competence. Through a specific learning system called intercultural learning, the capacity development is being practiced in various ways. It is the joint work of the European Union and the Council of Europe that is most actively developing and implementing an intercultural learning program for strengthening intercultural competence. This chapter aims to examine the interculturalism adopted as a philosophy along with the understanding of the intercultural learning policy proposed by the European Union and the Council of Europe as a policy alternative to cultural diversity. Accordingly, first, let us look at the multicultural situation and policy change process in the European situation mentioned by the European Union.

The European Union and the Council of Europe emphasize the role and utility of metacognition in designing intercultural learning, and cultural intelligence is being talked about as part of the intercultural learning capability that is the basis for this. Cultural intelligence theory is an intercultural communication theory that emerged in the early and mid-2000s. In order to go beyond a cross-cultural approach centered on knowledge transfer about other cultures, it actively embraces intrinsic motivation, self-efficacy, and metacognitive effects to strengthen the intercultural competence. Cultural intelligence theory is contemplating what kind of intrinsic motivation is needed to communicate with people from different cultural backgrounds and what methodologies can be used to create more mature intercultural encounters. By actively using metacognition as its methodology, it is systematizing the reinforcement of interactive global communication capabilities. In what follows, we will discuss cultural intelligence, one of the important intercultural abilities.

2. Multicultural society and policies

The European Union explains the background of adopting interculturalism as a basic philosophy for community solidarity by presenting and explaining the process of change in Europe’s response to the multicultural situation. Jointly with the Council of Europe, the European Union emphasizes the necessity and vision of interculturalism as the last step while proposing a five-step change in policy history in the European context. In what follows, I discuss the process of policy change in the multicultural situation shown by the European Union and the Council of Europe during the period after World War II. In European Union, the policy change pattern for multicultural situations in Europe can be defined by the following trends: 1) no policy; 2) guest worker policy; 3) assimilation policy; 4) multicultural policy; and 5) intercultural policy [2]. Although this series of policy terms and process of change cannot be directly applied to all individual member states of the European Union, the general multicultural response and contents in the European context have been developed in the order presented above.

If we look at the contents in more detail, the following observations can be made. First of all, “No policy,” which was the first stage, literally referred to a state in which there were no policy alternatives and practices for multicultural situations or societies. In the past, before the World War II, Europe focused only on securing its colonies by predatory powers as the struggle for supremacy between the imperialist powers reached its peak. Naturally, no consideration was given to the people of various cultural backgrounds within the colony. Their lives and human rights were so miserable that it could be said that they were no different from those of slaves. This situation continued until just after World War II in most European countries. People who emigrated from other countries were simply outsiders who were not recognized as belonging to the state, society, or city. In the end, the problem of migrants and minority groups was regarded as a short-term, temporary phenomenon that was not very important and that would not have a lasting impact. They were also seen as an unwelcome group. It was not recognized that a policy response was necessary on the national or city level.

The second step described in the EU is the “guest worker policy.” It was the first time to come up with a policy alternative to the issue of migrants, and the core of this policy was that migrants were regarded as temporary and short-term labor force. After World War II, many migrants who were actually invited to supply labor for such a need worked in various European countries. Definitely, the country that invited the workers thought that they would eventually return to their own country. So the policies were also designed to fit the short term, taking into account their expected working period. Naturally, from the perspective of the host country, it was expected that those who migrated as short-term workers would have little impact on the host country’s citizens. However, there were things that such expectations and the corresponding policies did not foresee, such as the long-term expansion of migration, including family migration and chain migration, and long-term settlement. Not only the labor force of migrants came in, but also a new culture entered the host countries.

Guest worker migration was originally a form of labor migration, allowing only temporary stays. However, contrary to expectations, many migrants who entered the country quickly adapted and settled down, and, in many cases, there was no reason for employers to force the replacement of skilled workers with new ones. Even from the perspective of the host country, it was not easy and costly to expel all migrants who came in after the labor period [3]. Due to these various reasons and circumstances, the number of cases of extended stays increased. There was also an increase in family migration based on family connections and serial migration, which is further extended to relatives and friends. In addition, children born to immigrant parents were also becoming a major national policy target to be resolved in the future regarding migration and multicultural issues.

The third stage is the “assimilation policy.” Assimilation literally means that, if migrants from different cultural backgrounds want to enter and settle in a new country, they must abandon their own culture and adopt the culture of the country they want to settle in. Only under these conditions was the long-term stay of migrants permitted. Of course, it was assumed that migrants should be absorbed into the new country and its culture as quickly as possible. Sanctions may be imposed if new migrants wish to adhere to their existing cultural customs or norms and were therefore considered a threat to national unity.

According to the assimilation policy, migrants must abandon their own culture and adopt the culture of the new country they migrated to. Another potentially problematic point here is migrants’ sense of inferiority to their own culture. This is a phenomenon found especially in the children of migrants, and it is said that a sense of inferiority to the parents’ culture is formed. Conversely, the sense of superiority that the culture of the newly emigrated country is more enlightened and developed leads to an exclusive self-culturalism based on superiority and inferiority in culture [3].

The fourth stage is “multicultural policy.” Multicultural policy is a new policy alternative that emerged as a reflection of realistic difficulties and violence of assimilation policy. Multicultural policy based on multiculturalism basically contained the spirit of tolerance and inclusiveness whereby migrants from various cultural backgrounds could maintain their cultural identity when they want to settle in a new country. Compared to the previous policies, it was a fairly innovative and inclusive policy. Immigrants could stay for a long time in the country they wanted to settle in while maintaining and upholding their cultural customs and norms, and they could also be protected by laws and institutional arrangements. Since people from the same cultural background could live together, the problem of separation from the mainstream culture could be raised, but it was adopted as a policy practice in a larger dimension of acknowledging cultural diversity.

As time passed, multiculturalism, which emerged as a developmental policy alternative to respect for cultural diversity, started to point out to various problems. It was a vicious cycle of poverty and exclusion of minority groups that appeared along with the fixation of segregation. Towns formed by minority groups, for example, concentrated in certain areas such as Koreatown and Chinatown, emerged as a new ghetto problem. They were increasingly separated from the mainstream community and had little contact, so exaggerated or unfounded prejudices grew among different communities. Areas densely inhabited by minorities were reduced to spaces of social and cultural exclusion, and places labeled as poor or rogue areas also emerged. As these problems began to become visible, one of the things that emerged amid the search for new alternatives in society was the intercultural policy. Of course, it should be noted that this is being developed with the European situation in mind. This historical policy development cannot be applied to other continents, as it is the EU’s own understanding and position on the multicultural situation.

The last step is the “Intercultural policy.” The biggest problem of this policy with respect to the existing multicultural policy is the “strengthening of segregation” due to the “absence of contact.” Multicultural policy based on multiculturalism recognized cultural diversity, protected it with laws and institutions on the national level, and guaranteed the settlement and livelihood of migrants. However, as separation from the mainstream community came to the fore, the absence of mutual contact emerged as a new problem. Based on this awareness of the problem, intercultural policy adopts interculturalism as its policy philosophy, rather than the existing multiculturalism. Therefore, interculturalism values contact and communication between cultures. Said differently, it emphasizes the necessity of “communication” between cultures and sees intercultural communication as dynamic, rather than static. Therefore, intercultural competence and intercultural communication skills are inevitably highlighted in policy and educational aspects [4].

According to the intercultural policy, migrants can be accepted and settled in the long term, and their differences in cultural customs and norms should also be recognized and protected by laws and institutions. This policy emphasizes the importance of policies and systems that create mutual understanding and empathy between cultures. It aims to reduce the situation of ignoring diversity (guest workers policy), rejecting diversity (assimilation policy), or building up cultural walls high by overemphasizing diversity (multicultural policy). Interculturalism is about articulating the value of diversity by mobilizing everything possible to promote interaction and blending between culturally different communities [5, 6].

3. From multiculturalism to interculturalism

Interculturalism positively interprets the recognition of the value of cultural diversity and the hybridity brought about by cultural diversity. This point is in line with what the European Union pursues through its cultural and educational exchange policy. The European Union sees diversity as a source of dynamism, innovation, and creative growth. That is why diversity is regarded as a valuable European heritage. Therefore, in the public domain, including educational systems such as schools and universities, the European Union is trying to create a lot of places where people of various cultural backgrounds can interact with and contact each other.

Multiculturalism has the characteristic of giving priority to groups in the relationship between groups and individuals. Said differently, group identity precedes individual identity. Specific groups are identified and categorized. This characteristic is pointed out as the limit of multiculturalism and is a key characteristic that has an important influence on many other problems. The problems of multiculturalism include spatialization of differences, attitudes of alienation and exclusion, and restrictions on social mobility [7].

However, in the intercultural approach, it is the “person” that is important, not his/her culture. Accordingly, in the relationship between the group and the individual, the identity of the individual has a more important meaning. When looking at others, people try to avoid comprehending or comparing them only by confining them to a specific culture or ethnicity. The intercultural approach emphasizes “relationships,” rather than the individual or culture itself that is regarded as a monad. In this respect, cultural differences should not be objectively given with static properties, but should be viewed through the prism of a dynamic relationship between two entities that give meaning to each other. It is also important to point out that these “movements” are “interactive.”

Multiculturalism emphasizes respect for cultural diversity, and its main purpose is to educate minorities and immigrant groups to adapt to the society. On the other hand, interculturalism emphasizes that not only the culture of the country to which a small group of migrants migrated, but also the majority group that welcomes migrants must learn the culture of migrants or minorities in return. The concept of “inter” emphasizes not simply juxtaposing different cultures without close connection, but making them constantly face each other. The positive meeting between the two is a channel that makes communication possible.

Interculturalism aims to share and understand different cultural backgrounds, values, and experiences through a dynamic and interactive dialog. While the core of multiculturalism is to acknowledge the multiple coexistence of different cultures, interculturalism places importance on dynamic and interactive interactions between these cultures. Interculturalism also very positively interprets the potential for cultural hybridization brought about by cultural diversity. Thus, it seeks to maximize the advantages of diversity through intercultural innovation. It is a belief and aspiration for creative diversity. The basic principle here is openness. It leads to the ability to constantly go beyond one’s realm and become curious and not afraid of new things.

An intercultural society can be defined as a society that recognizes the environment of cultural diversity and dreams of a harmonious society through a smooth communication among different cultures, and a society that uses cultural diversity as a source of creativity to produce positive outcomes. In order to realize such a society, we need the skill and ability for communication among different cultures. The European Union emphasizes the need for educational efforts in order to realize a mature intercultural dialog, as desirable human relationships begin with mature attitudes toward each other. Based on this, as time goes by, we can gradually understand each other’s feelings and even share emotions. The European Union sees this as a significant task, while the goal of intercultural dialog is to lead to a positive understanding of diversity and the evolution of intercultural relationships.

4. Intercultural learning and intercultural competence

The European Union and the Council of Europe clearly recognize that, above all else, the ability to peacefully coexist based on intercultural understanding is necessary to constructively solve the problem of diversity in present-day Europe. As the UK eventually left the European Union, the European Union now consists of 27 member states, with 24 official national languages. The cultural diversity of 27 member states and 24 official national languages means that it can become an obstacle to future development or be reborn as a new development engine, depending on how Europe solves the challenge of diversity. Due to this realization, the European Union promotes the development of intercultural learning based on interculturalism.

According to the European Union and the Council of Europe, which are most actively presenting the necessity and meaning of intercultural learning, intercultural learning is regarded as a process of lifelong learning. Through intercultural learning, it is intended to positively accept cultural diversity, pursue equality of human dignity, and enhance capacity development for mutual solidarity and coexistence [8]. It has not been long before the full-scale discussion and implementation for intercultural learning on the EU level. The European Union and the Council of Europe republished the Intercultural Learning Guidelines first created in 2000 with major revisions and supplements in 2018. The contents that had been briefly conceived in 2000 were presented in more detail through additional revisions and supplements in 2018.

The reason for the version upgrade can be explained as follows. It is for the continuous development of intercultural competence as a competence that European young people must have in the “globalized and interconnected multicultural world.” Five directions for intercultural learning to develop intercultural competence include the following [9]: 1) promotion of an understanding of the structures of power in society and the relationships between individuals and groups; 2) extension to the open identity concept; 3) cultivating young people’s cross-cultural communication skills; 4) promoting curiosity and understanding of the world’s diversity; and 5) acquiring the value of diversity and human rights. What all these five directions pursue is, in a word, to learn and nurture how to live peacefully with respect for each other in a multicultural world.

Now, what specific topics are the learning objectives in this broad framework connected to in full-fledged learning activities? The educational activities presented as a pilot model for intercultural learning reveal that the thinking process on six topics is deepened. The goal is to set six major themes judged to be the core of intercultural learning and ultimately induce “changes in attitudes and thoughts toward myself and others” through reflection on the issues.

These six major themes are as follows [9]: 1) identity; 2) culture; 3) difference of perspective; 4) stereotype, prejudice, discrimination; 5) intercultural communication; and 6) social and political context. These six core themes are not independent, but are organically connected. Here, one important characteristic of the six major themes that we should pay attention to is that they all require deep thinking and reflection. Then, let us take a look at what leads to intercultural reflection.

1. Identity: Identity has been formed through the past, but also continues to change through the present and the future. Accordingly, identity has the duality of being and becoming at the same time, and is constantly exchanging and receiving intercultural influences. The question of whether it is the development of a more open and mature identity, or the trigger of a conflict, is an important task and is the first core topic in intercultural learning.

2. Culture: Identity and culture have a very close relationship; similar to identity, culture is not a fixed entity. Also, we want to make it clear that, through learning, there is no hierarchy between cultures, avoiding the view that certain cultures are superior or inferior to others. Therefore, what is needed in the process of intercultural learning is the continuous exploration of different cultures and identities.

3. Difference of perspective: Cultural diversity can lead to abundant coexistence when it presupposes inclusive acceptance of different lives, perspectives, and attitudes, rather than cultural homogenization or an approach to intercultural hierarchies. In intercultural learning, an open attitude to diversity and understanding and embracing various perspectives are important as practical learning tasks.

4. Stereotypes, prejudices, discrimination: It is necessary to understand how stereotypes and prejudices are formed and persist in daily direct and indirect experiences. The metacognitive ability requires stepping back and thinking about the stereotypes and prejudices that are being created for oneself. Furthermore, we critically think about discrimination in various societies and their causes and consequences.

5. Intercultural communication: It reduces preconceived notions and prejudices about other cultures and leaves hasty assumptions and judgments by asking enough questions before making a value judgment. In intercultural communication, we increase our metacognitive ability to think, speak, and act on the process itself. It is necessary to accumulate positive communication results and achievements by focusing more on the solution, rather than sticking to the problem. This also contributes to the improvement of self-efficacy in intercultural communication.

6. Social and political context: As a topic related to gradual future social change, it is necessary to have an insight into the impact, change, and task of cultural diversity on society as a whole. It is a matter of capacity to recognize changes in the social and political landscape and to consider what kind of response is required. Long-term perspectives and thinking capabilities are necessary to sustain the concerns that can be taken as a mature citizen beyond vague short-term reactions and thoughts.

5. Cultural intelligence as intercultural competence

Cultural diversity not only implies that a plurality of different and unique cultures exists in the world, but also includes the justifiable proposition that these should be shared and enjoyed as a rich asset of mankind beyond the conflicts caused by cultural differences. Intercultural competence can play an important role in this regard. Said differently, seeing unfamiliar and heterogeneous cultures without prejudice and enhancing understanding through mutual dialog can contribute to cultural diversity. Through this, it ultimately contributes to the development and peace of human culture.

This can be thought of in connection with the concept of “confirmation bias.” Confirmation bias is a tendency to accept information consistent with one’s beliefs and ignore information that does not agree with one’s beliefs; that is, it is a phenomenon where cognitive distortions are committed to confirm one’s thoughts [10]. In this case, they look at others with a preconceived notion and continue to maintain their stereotypes without new discoveries or changes through encounters. It simply reflects the psychology of wanting to continue to look at the world as I thought it would; however, biased thinking that creates and classifies categories makes the consideration of diversity itself uncomfortable and easy to develop a sense of superiority. It is a common error we make when we perceive the other in a multicultural society, and this explains why it is not so easy to meet and communicate between cultures.

The most obvious way to reduce intergroup conflict and prejudice is to allow members of different groups to meet more frequently, breaking down boundaries and building bridges between closed communities. As such, the most urgent prerequisite in meeting people of different cultures is the ability of an intercultural dialog. UNESCO proposes the following three basics of intercultural dialog [11]. First, “listening” as a basic ability for intercultural encounters is an effort and attitude to “sympathize with experiences and gain insight into the hearts of others.” Second, “conversation” is “understanding from the inside, i.e., a conversation to meet the other as myself.” The third is “curiosity.” It means “active openness” and refers to the ability to understand the possibilities of other existential choices. When intercultural dialog is possible based on these three abilities, intercultural competence as a cultural literacy can be developed.

Previous research on understanding and adaptability to various cultures has been conducted for several decades due to the changes in various social environments brought about by globalization, and its importance is constantly growing. In this context, cultural intelligence has recently emerged as one of the intercultural competences. The distinctiveness of cultural intelligence is the development of a systematic methodology that scientifically proves and quantifies this ability. The view on the ability to adapt between cultures as an intelligence presupposes that each individual is different and that it can be improved through will and effort. Therefore, cultural intelligence is a concept that is open to anyone, and various methods for developing it have been proposed.

In global business, it has been previously acknowledged that IQ (intelligence quotient) alone cannot judge competent talent. In addition to IQ , EQ (emotional intelligence) and SQ (social intelligence) are also central concepts. However, although these may also be effective within the same culture, it is difficult to guarantee whether they will be effective in the face of multicultural situations. Therefore, considering the global market where cultural diversity is emerging as an important business environment today, it is very natural for CQ (cultural intelligence) to get scholarly attention. Cultural intelligence is often referred to as “CQ (Cultural Quotient)” in the sense that it is one of several forms of human intelligence.

The concept of cultural intelligence is based on theories of comparative cultural management that started in the 1980s, that is, the achievements of scholars such as Geert Hofstede [12], Fons Trompenaars [13], and Edward Hall [1, 14–16]. While most of their cross-cultural approaches focused on knowledge of cultural differences, cultural intelligence sought to find a more holistic methodology that could effectively adapt to other cultures using this knowledge. Existing theories on intelligence are also accepted as important prior research. It is used based on the components of motivation, cognition, meta-cognition, and behavior that are common in various types of intelligence.

The main discussion on the concept of cultural intelligence is Cultural Intelligence, published by Brooks Peterson in 2004 [17], and CQ: Developing Cultural Intelligence at Work, authored by Christopher Earley in 2010 [18] with two colleagues. Recently, David Livermore has been promoting the concept of cultural intelligence worldwide through his active writings and various activities through the Cultural Intelligence Center. Cultural intelligence is the ability to effectively respond to multicultural situations. No one today can be said to be independent of the problems posed by multicultural situations.

According to David Livermore [19], cultural intelligence refers to the ability of humans to effectively cope in culturally diverse situations. For example, it refers to the ability to effectively work together through intercultural communication skills in various situations of cultural diversity, including schools, workplaces, and organizations. He proposed four steps to understanding and developing cultural intelligence: CQ-drive, CQ-knowledge, CQ-strategy, and CQ-action. CQ-Drive refers to an individual’s interest, curiosity, and confidence in cultural diversity as the first factor that enables to effectively collaborate in culturally diverse contexts. CQ-Knowledge is the knowledge of differences and similarities between cultures and is the second factor for cultural intelligence. Next, the CQ-strategy is a strategy for how individuals can empirically make cultural diversity meaningful. Finally, CQ-action refers to the ability to act maturely when confronted with a situation of cultural diversity, verbally or non-verbally.

According to Christopher Earley [18], cultural intelligence refers to the ability to observe and understand in encounters with other cultures, to feel motivated to interact, and to put them into action. Earley divided the elements of cultural intelligence into three components and analyzed how each concept is interrelated, presenting the process of developing cultural intelligence. The three elements of cultural intelligence include “cultural strategic thinking,” which encompasses cultural knowledge and mindset, “motivation” to take action with patience and confidence, and “action” to appropriately respond to a given situation. Cultural Strategic Thinking is related to the general thinking techniques used to understand the ways and reasons for the behavior of people from different cultures. This allows us to capture and understand the beliefs and value systems of people from other cultures, as well as the procedures and practices of behavior. The motivation of cultural intelligence is given according to the core values and preferences, and through this, purpose and intention can be articulated. The behavioral aspect of cultural intelligence refers to the ability to observe, perceive, regulate, and act appropriately when in contact with other cultures.

Furthermore, Brooks Peterson also argued the concept of cultural intelligence and emphasizes its importance [17]. He saw cultural intelligence as the combination of knowledge and perception of culture and specific skills. In this context, knowledge of culture refers to knowledge of cultural facts and characteristics, awareness refers to awareness of oneself and others, and specific skills refer to actions. That is, cultural intelligence refers to the ability to act by demonstrating the skills and qualities to respond appropriately to the cultural value standards and attitudes of others with whom one interacts. Skills refer to language ability or interpersonal relationships, and qualities refer to, for example, the degree to which one can tolerate ambiguity or flexibility.

Cultural intelligence can be defined as ability to integrate cultural diversity. Cultural intelligence, which is compared to a single organism with a head, heart, and body, connects various culturally distinct dimensions as a whole to make them perceive, experience, and act. In fact, this neologism, which combines intelligence with an extremely broad and difficult concept of culture, is highly likely to be controversial. In this regard, Christopher Earley suggested that, rather than measuring the cultural intelligence quotient, we should focus on defining it and increasing cultural intelligence [18]. Earley argued that the idea that cultural intelligence is immutable and cannot be increased is wrong. He emphasized that cultural intelligence can be improved through continuous effort. A series of processes of acquiring knowledge about various cultures and a framework for strategic thinking, feeling self-motivated, and taking action appropriate to the situation is difficult to accomplish overnight.

6. Conclusion: towards intercultural citizens

If we consider intercultural learning strategies proposed by the European Union and the Council of Europe, “awareness of the ability to think” is the focal concept. It is the development of the metacognitive ability of “thinking about thinking.” In addition, citizens with high intercultural communication capacity can be called intercultural citizens. Since culture is not easy to define as a simple concept, it may be misused or misunderstood. Moreover, culture has a concreteness that is deeply involved in everyday reality. Therefore, culture cannot be separated from social reality, and we all are influenced by culture and vice versa. Since culture is a dynamic combination of both the visible and the invisible, intercultural learning must also require very dynamic thinking. The importance of the keyword culture in intercultural learning is because it influences understanding the world, interpreting the world, and forming a specific worldview [9].

Another relevant concept is cognitive mischief. This term is used in cognitive psychology to refer to a person who refuses to think deeply [20]. A changing world encounters with unfamiliar cultures and people, and the anxiety and ambiguity of the unfamiliar, all of which can induce new mental fatigue, can turn humans into cognitive mischief. It is a category that cognitive mischief conveniently uses as a means of justifying the self. This is because people can find peace of mind and peace of mind within several artificially and arbitrarily selected categories. It is a situation of a paradox, rather than being trapped in a category, an imperfect tool made to understand the world.

The same category problem is being discussed in the cultural intelligence strategy. Everyone has their own category width. According to the breadth of categories, attitudes toward people and the world change, the wider the category, the more tolerant and inclusive. Intercultural learning should be able to contribute to broadening the range of categories, and the cultural intelligence strategy emphasizes the training of the mind, and more specifically, “mindfulness.” It is the practice of looking at the world through a bigger picture, and “awareness of the mind” that broadens the horizon of awareness about the diversity of the world that exists [19]. When this occurs, people can expand their horizons and take a more mature attitude in dealing with values.

Currently, in Europe, the European Federation for Intercultural Learning has been launched, and the first strategy is being established and materialized [21]. From a long-term perspective, European policy makers seem to have started making efforts to make intercultural learning a reality on the European level. It is expected that program development and cooperative policy seeking will continue. In the era of cultural diversity, it appears that both the European Union and us need to delve deeper into how far people can understand, empathize, and coexist with each other, as well as explore to what extent intercultural learning and practice to enhance it can be possible.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea and the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2021S1A5A2A01064089).