本体-认识论和研究伦理委员会:走向反思伦理

IF 1.4 3区 社会学 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Qualitative Inquiry Pub Date : 2023-11-03 DOI:10.1177/10778004231209064
Giulia Carozzi, Lindsey K. Horner
{"title":"本体-认识论和研究伦理委员会:走向反思伦理","authors":"Giulia Carozzi, Lindsey K. Horner","doi":"10.1177/10778004231209064","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article posits that current priorities of many research ethics boards make them a self-undermining entity in that they perpetuate the erasure of certain knowledges and with them the bodies subjectivities and subjects that live them. Through obscuring the history, geography and onto-epistemology of the assumptions underpinning ethical review these boards reproduce dominant Eurocentric and postpositivist assumptions about what is and isn’t valid or worthy research. Employing Santos’s notion of epistemicide and joining it with Barad’s ethico-onto-epistem-ology we explore how the instruments of “Ethics” act as a mechanism for reinforcing what Massey labels a dominant “geography of productions of knowledge”","PeriodicalId":48395,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Inquiry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Onto-Epistemicide and the Research Ethics Board: Toward a Reflexive Ethics\",\"authors\":\"Giulia Carozzi, Lindsey K. Horner\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10778004231209064\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article posits that current priorities of many research ethics boards make them a self-undermining entity in that they perpetuate the erasure of certain knowledges and with them the bodies subjectivities and subjects that live them. Through obscuring the history, geography and onto-epistemology of the assumptions underpinning ethical review these boards reproduce dominant Eurocentric and postpositivist assumptions about what is and isn’t valid or worthy research. Employing Santos’s notion of epistemicide and joining it with Barad’s ethico-onto-epistem-ology we explore how the instruments of “Ethics” act as a mechanism for reinforcing what Massey labels a dominant “geography of productions of knowledge”\",\"PeriodicalId\":48395,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Qualitative Inquiry\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Qualitative Inquiry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10778004231209064\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Qualitative Inquiry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10778004231209064","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文认为,目前许多研究伦理委员会的优先事项使它们成为一个自我破坏的实体,因为它们使某些知识的抹除永久化,并与之伴随的是身体主体性和生活在这些知识中的主体。通过模糊支撑伦理审查的历史、地理和本体认识论假设,这些委员会再现了欧洲中心主义和后实证主义关于什么是有效的或不值得研究的主流假设。运用桑托斯的知识灭杀概念并将其与巴拉德的伦理-本体-认识论相结合我们探索了“伦理学”的工具如何作为一种机制来强化梅西所标记的占主导地位的“知识生产地理”
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Onto-Epistemicide and the Research Ethics Board: Toward a Reflexive Ethics
This article posits that current priorities of many research ethics boards make them a self-undermining entity in that they perpetuate the erasure of certain knowledges and with them the bodies subjectivities and subjects that live them. Through obscuring the history, geography and onto-epistemology of the assumptions underpinning ethical review these boards reproduce dominant Eurocentric and postpositivist assumptions about what is and isn’t valid or worthy research. Employing Santos’s notion of epistemicide and joining it with Barad’s ethico-onto-epistem-ology we explore how the instruments of “Ethics” act as a mechanism for reinforcing what Massey labels a dominant “geography of productions of knowledge”
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Qualitative Inquiry
Qualitative Inquiry SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
10.00%
发文量
143
期刊介绍: Qualitative Inquiry provides an interdisciplinary forum for qualitative methodology and related issues in the human sciences. With Qualitative Inquiry you have access to lively dialogues, current research and the latest developments in qualitative methodology.
期刊最新文献
Teaching Postqualitatively Feeling or Funding? Critical Coproduction, Rationality, Emotionality, and Axiological Reflections The Researcher’s Facilitating Role in Stimulating a Constructive Group Climate in Online Focus-Group Interviews Danger, Desire, and Disclosure: A Postqualitative Trauma-Informed Approach to the Ethics of Secrets and Emotion in Qualitative Research Humility, Textuality, and Method in Phenomenological Research
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1