Representation, Ideology and Writing from Below: On the Paradox of Standpoint Epistemology and the Limits of Intersectionality

IF 0.7 Q3 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Socialist Studies Pub Date : 2020-04-20 DOI:10.18740/ss27225
I. Hussey
{"title":"Representation, Ideology and Writing from Below: On the Paradox of Standpoint Epistemology and the Limits of Intersectionality","authors":"I. Hussey","doi":"10.18740/ss27225","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Feminist standpoint epistemology (FSE) is an important form of writing from below; that is, writing from embodied experience. FSE and other forms of writing from below involve practices of representation that are mediated by ideology. In this article, I tease out some of the complexities and limitations of feminist efforts to use FSE to situate and embody thought. Some feminist standpoint theorists understand Cartesian dualism as a dualism or a division that can be collapsed or reversed, but I show that what is called “Cartesian dualism” is in fact a paradox and therefore cannot be overcome but must be grappled with on an ongoing basis in our efforts to write from below. The article begins with an exploration of the basic tenets and presumptions of two schools of FSE. While neither school can evade the politics of representation, I show that one is able to withstand an intersectional critique whilst the other is not. Having unpacked these schools of FSE, I reflect on Himani Bannerji’s ideology critique of intersectionality to lay bare the limitations of this concept that some writers from below deploy and to advance a reflexive materialist epistemology.","PeriodicalId":29667,"journal":{"name":"Socialist Studies","volume":"39 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Socialist Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18740/ss27225","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Feminist standpoint epistemology (FSE) is an important form of writing from below; that is, writing from embodied experience. FSE and other forms of writing from below involve practices of representation that are mediated by ideology. In this article, I tease out some of the complexities and limitations of feminist efforts to use FSE to situate and embody thought. Some feminist standpoint theorists understand Cartesian dualism as a dualism or a division that can be collapsed or reversed, but I show that what is called “Cartesian dualism” is in fact a paradox and therefore cannot be overcome but must be grappled with on an ongoing basis in our efforts to write from below. The article begins with an exploration of the basic tenets and presumptions of two schools of FSE. While neither school can evade the politics of representation, I show that one is able to withstand an intersectional critique whilst the other is not. Having unpacked these schools of FSE, I reflect on Himani Bannerji’s ideology critique of intersectionality to lay bare the limitations of this concept that some writers from below deploy and to advance a reflexive materialist epistemology.
再现、意识形态与自下而上的书写——论立场认识论的悖论与交叉性的局限
女性主义立场认识论(FSE)是一种重要的自下而上的写作形式;也就是说,从具体化的经验中写作。FSE和其他形式的自下而上的写作涉及到以意识形态为媒介的表现实践。在这篇文章中,我梳理了一些女性主义者使用FSE来定位和体现思想的复杂性和局限性。一些女权主义立场的理论家将笛卡尔二元论理解为一种二元论,或者一种可以崩溃或逆转的分裂,但我认为所谓的“笛卡尔二元论”实际上是一个悖论,因此无法被克服,但必须在我们努力从下面开始写作的持续基础上加以解决。本文首先探讨了两个学派的基本原则和假设。虽然这两种学派都无法回避代表性的政治,但我表明,一种学派能够经受住交叉批判,而另一种学派则不能。在分析了FSE的这些学派之后,我反思了Himani Bannerji对交叉性的意识形态批判,以揭示这一概念的局限性,并提出了一种反思性唯物主义认识论。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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