Parsing “Decolonisation”

IF 0.7 0 PHILOSOPHY
Phronimon Pub Date : 2018-09-05 DOI:10.25159/2413-3086/3064
B. Olivier
{"title":"Parsing “Decolonisation”","authors":"B. Olivier","doi":"10.25159/2413-3086/3064","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article addresses the fraught question of “decolonisation” at South African universities—what does it mean when students and some academic staff members call for the decolonisation of the curriculum? The issue of legitimate participation in the debate is raised, as well as that of the “incommensurability thesis”—the claim that individuals working within a certain “paradigmatically distinct” theory or within an identifiable discourse, cannot understand those working within other theoretical paradigms, and therefore thwart discussion between pro-decolonisers and those who oppose it. The consideration that, regardless of culture, or race, or gender, all human subjects are linguistic beings, is related to the mutual translatability of languages, and the notion of always being embedded in a cultural life-world. Instead of remaining relativistically imprisoned in the latter, it is argued that the sciences afford people the opportunity to step away from their involvement in this life-world, with its cultural prejudices, to meet one another through a shared terminology and conceptual or theoretical apparatus that enable one to understand the (natural and social) world in a manner that allows intersubjective understanding. The point is made that, for something to be scientific (or “rational”), any human being should be able to “test” or examine, or simply enter into a (sometimes difficult) dialogue about it. Unless these issues are kept in mind, one cannot even begin to discuss the merits of the demand for decolonisation. It is acknowledged, however, that there are “knowledges” that have been (unjustifiably) “disqualified” by Western culture as being “inadequate” in terms of “scientific cognition.” For this reason it is argued that every scholar, scientist or philosopher must be willing to see beyond the confines of privileged Western knowledge to acknowledge these “excluded knowledges” and to affirm that they are epistemic “equals” of, albeit different from, Western knowledge.","PeriodicalId":42048,"journal":{"name":"Phronimon","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2018-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Phronimon","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25159/2413-3086/3064","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This article addresses the fraught question of “decolonisation” at South African universities—what does it mean when students and some academic staff members call for the decolonisation of the curriculum? The issue of legitimate participation in the debate is raised, as well as that of the “incommensurability thesis”—the claim that individuals working within a certain “paradigmatically distinct” theory or within an identifiable discourse, cannot understand those working within other theoretical paradigms, and therefore thwart discussion between pro-decolonisers and those who oppose it. The consideration that, regardless of culture, or race, or gender, all human subjects are linguistic beings, is related to the mutual translatability of languages, and the notion of always being embedded in a cultural life-world. Instead of remaining relativistically imprisoned in the latter, it is argued that the sciences afford people the opportunity to step away from their involvement in this life-world, with its cultural prejudices, to meet one another through a shared terminology and conceptual or theoretical apparatus that enable one to understand the (natural and social) world in a manner that allows intersubjective understanding. The point is made that, for something to be scientific (or “rational”), any human being should be able to “test” or examine, or simply enter into a (sometimes difficult) dialogue about it. Unless these issues are kept in mind, one cannot even begin to discuss the merits of the demand for decolonisation. It is acknowledged, however, that there are “knowledges” that have been (unjustifiably) “disqualified” by Western culture as being “inadequate” in terms of “scientific cognition.” For this reason it is argued that every scholar, scientist or philosopher must be willing to see beyond the confines of privileged Western knowledge to acknowledge these “excluded knowledges” and to affirm that they are epistemic “equals” of, albeit different from, Western knowledge.
这篇文章解决了南非大学“非殖民化”这一令人担忧的问题。“当学生和一些学术人员呼吁课程非殖民化时,这意味着什么?”?提出了合法参与辩论的问题,以及“不可通约性理论”的问题,即在某种“范式上不同”的理论或可识别的话语中工作的个人无法理解那些在其他理论范式中工作的人,因此阻碍了支持非殖民化者和反对非殖民化者之间的讨论。考虑到,无论文化、种族或性别如何,所有人类主体都是语言主体,这与语言的相互可译性以及始终嵌入文化生活世界的概念有关。有人认为,科学并没有相对地被监禁在后者中,而是让人们有机会摆脱对这个充满文化偏见的生活世界的参与,通过一个共享的术语和概念或理论装置来认识彼此,使人们能够以一种允许主体间理解的方式理解(自然和社会)世界。有人指出,为了使某件事成为科学的(或“理性的”),任何人都应该能够“测试”或检查,或者简单地就此进行(有时是困难的)对话。除非牢记这些问题,否则人们甚至无法开始讨论非殖民化要求的优点。然而,人们承认,有些“知识”在“科学认知”方面被西方文化(不合理地)“取消资格”。因此,有人认为,每一位学者,科学家或哲学家必须愿意超越西方特权知识的局限,承认这些“被排斥的知识”,并确认它们在认识上与西方知识“相等”,尽管不同。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Phronimon
Phronimon PHILOSOPHY-
自引率
25.00%
发文量
5
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信