Beyond Understanding

Q1 Arts and Humanities
Rohan Ghatage
{"title":"Beyond Understanding","authors":"Rohan Ghatage","doi":"10.7227/jbr.5.5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This essay establishes a philosophical connection between James Baldwin and the\n philosopher William James by investigating how the pragmatist protocol against\n “vicious intellectualism” offers Baldwin a key resource for\n thinking through how anti-black racism might be dismantled. While Richard Wright\n had earlier denounced pragmatism for privileging experience over knowledge, and\n thereby offering the black subject no means for redressing America’s\n constitutive hierarchies, uncovering the current of Jamesian thought that runs\n through Baldwin’s essays brings into view his attempt to move beyond\n epistemology as the primary framework for inaugurating a future unburdened by\n the problem of the color line. Although Baldwin indicts contemporaneous\n arrangements of knowledge for producing the most dehumanizing forms of racism,\n he does not simply attempt to rewrite the enervating meanings to which black\n subjects are given. Articulating a pragmatist sensibility at various stages of\n his career, Baldwin repeatedly suggests that the imagining and creation of a\n better world is predicated upon rethinking the normative value accorded to\n knowledge in the practice of politics. The provocative challenge that Baldwin\n issues for his reader is to cease the well-established privileging of knowledge,\n and to instead stage the struggle for freedom within an aesthetic, rather than\n epistemological, paradigm.","PeriodicalId":36467,"journal":{"name":"James Baldwin Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"25","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"James Baldwin Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7227/jbr.5.5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 25

Abstract

This essay establishes a philosophical connection between James Baldwin and the philosopher William James by investigating how the pragmatist protocol against “vicious intellectualism” offers Baldwin a key resource for thinking through how anti-black racism might be dismantled. While Richard Wright had earlier denounced pragmatism for privileging experience over knowledge, and thereby offering the black subject no means for redressing America’s constitutive hierarchies, uncovering the current of Jamesian thought that runs through Baldwin’s essays brings into view his attempt to move beyond epistemology as the primary framework for inaugurating a future unburdened by the problem of the color line. Although Baldwin indicts contemporaneous arrangements of knowledge for producing the most dehumanizing forms of racism, he does not simply attempt to rewrite the enervating meanings to which black subjects are given. Articulating a pragmatist sensibility at various stages of his career, Baldwin repeatedly suggests that the imagining and creation of a better world is predicated upon rethinking the normative value accorded to knowledge in the practice of politics. The provocative challenge that Baldwin issues for his reader is to cease the well-established privileging of knowledge, and to instead stage the struggle for freedom within an aesthetic, rather than epistemological, paradigm.
难以理解
本文通过调查反对“恶毒的智性主义”的实用主义协议如何为鲍德温提供思考如何消除反黑人种族主义的关键资源,在詹姆斯·鲍德温和哲学家威廉·詹姆斯之间建立了哲学联系。虽然理查德·赖特早些时候谴责实用主义将经验置于知识之上,从而没有为黑人主体提供任何手段来纠正美国的构成等级制度,揭示贯穿鲍德温散文的詹姆斯思想潮流,使人们看到他试图超越认识论,将其作为开创一个不受肤色问题影响的未来的主要框架。尽管鲍德温指责同时代的知识安排产生了最非人的种族主义形式,但他并不是简单地试图改写黑人被赋予的令人衰弱的意义。鲍德温在其职业生涯的各个阶段表达了实用主义的情感,他反复建议,想象和创造一个更美好的世界是基于重新思考政治实践中赋予知识的规范价值。鲍德温向读者提出的挑衅性挑战是,停止公认的知识特权,转而在美学而非认识论的范式中为自由而战。
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
James Baldwin Review
James Baldwin Review Arts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
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