3modeling the social action allows predictions and implicitlythe controlofthe effects of asocial action by manipulating its determinant factors. Now, the essential change here isthat the goalofscientific explanation is no longer the control the social action but the
ofit.Thecontribution of postmodern critique to acknowledging the contextual, cultural (i.e.historical, geographical, political) determinations of the scientific explanations and ,implicitly, of the worldviews that generated those explanations overshadows theimportance of discovering the cause-effect relationships and reorients the explanationtowards the interpretation of the social action. The postmodern disapproval of theuniversality of a particular scientific discourse localizes the cause-effect explanations, itmakes it dependent of the place, time and sometimes even the politics in which thatparticular explanation was written. The anthropological addition to the postmoderncritique is that even the object to be explained (in particular the social action) may be justas non-universal as the attempts to explain it. The social action does not mean the samething in different cultural contexts. Even if on the surface, it seems to be the same thing –for example respecting the law –the meaning of itsays Geertz, may be quite different ina Islamic, Indian or westernculture.Whatdoes aninterpretative explanation looklike? Reorienting the scientific explanationfrom controlto hermeneutics/interpretation has consequences on both its nature and themethodologyused in constructing it. The analogies inspired by the natural sciences in anambition to create a “social physics” (Geertz, C.1993, p.23) are replaced by analogiesinpired from literature or theater, from the humanities in general. The explanationbecomes “connecting the action with its meaning rather than connecting behavior to itsdeterminats” (Geertz, C. 1993, p.34).
Cultural system –local knowledge as a contextually determined pattern of interpretation of reality
Differences between cultures, between localized systems of knowledge become visibleduring the attempts to intercultural understanding, and they do so bycreating difficulties.When a person that belongs to a particular culture is in a position to observe a socialaction in a cultural context that is different from his own, he will have difficulties inevaluating that situation especially because the evaluation criteria he will be using belongto the culture he is coming from and not to the culture he is evaluating. Such crossculturalencounters are of course not new, theyhave existed long before the post-modernorientation in social sciences. However, quite new, (in -what else than -relative terms) istaking in consideration these difficulties as opportunities to interpretation rather thanautomatic evaluation of differenceas something that is less or under developed.
Common sense asdomain of cultural expression
. Even if it is perceived by the oneswho are practicing it as a natural attribute, inherent and defining of the normal behavior,an attribute that accompanies without any cognitive effort the behavior of a common