被盗土地上的本土化哲学:对定居者哲学监护的担忧

IF 0.2 4区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY Pluralist Pub Date : 2022-02-26 DOI:10.5406/19446489.17.1.04
Anna Cook
{"title":"被盗土地上的本土化哲学:对定居者哲学监护的担忧","authors":"Anna Cook","doi":"10.5406/19446489.17.1.04","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Many Canadian universities have taken heed of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s recommendations to ‘Indigenize’ their curricula. The worry remains, however, that the language of reconciliation is empty rhetoric that “metaphorizes” decolonization, rather than responds to the demands of Indigenous communities for self-determination and land back. This paper aims to consider what the activity of ‘Indigenizing’ academic philosophy (and ethics more specifically) might involve. In particular, it raises the worry that the integration of Indigenous philosophy into ethics curriculum might assimilate an understanding of “grounded normativity” into settler understandings of groundless or placeless normativity. Such an assimilation would be an operation of what Cherokee philosopher Brian Yazzie Burkhart calls “settler philosophical guardianship.” For this reason, this paper contends that the work of meaningfully ‘Indigenizing’ philosophical curricula must first critically investigate an account of placeless normativity as a function of the settler colonial drive for expansion and elimination.","PeriodicalId":42609,"journal":{"name":"Pluralist","volume":"17 1","pages":"34 - 44"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Indigenizing Philosophy on Stolen Lands: A Worry about Settler Philosophical Guardianship\",\"authors\":\"Anna Cook\",\"doi\":\"10.5406/19446489.17.1.04\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Many Canadian universities have taken heed of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s recommendations to ‘Indigenize’ their curricula. The worry remains, however, that the language of reconciliation is empty rhetoric that “metaphorizes” decolonization, rather than responds to the demands of Indigenous communities for self-determination and land back. This paper aims to consider what the activity of ‘Indigenizing’ academic philosophy (and ethics more specifically) might involve. In particular, it raises the worry that the integration of Indigenous philosophy into ethics curriculum might assimilate an understanding of “grounded normativity” into settler understandings of groundless or placeless normativity. Such an assimilation would be an operation of what Cherokee philosopher Brian Yazzie Burkhart calls “settler philosophical guardianship.” For this reason, this paper contends that the work of meaningfully ‘Indigenizing’ philosophical curricula must first critically investigate an account of placeless normativity as a function of the settler colonial drive for expansion and elimination.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42609,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pluralist\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"34 - 44\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pluralist\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5406/19446489.17.1.04\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pluralist","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5406/19446489.17.1.04","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

许多加拿大大学采纳了真相与和解委员会(Truth and Reconciliation Commission)的建议,将课程“本土化”。然而,令人担忧的是,和解的语言是空洞的修辞,“隐喻”非殖民化,而不是回应土著社区自决和收回土地的要求。本文旨在考虑“本土化”学术哲学(更具体地说是伦理学)可能涉及的活动。尤其令人担忧的是,将土著哲学纳入伦理课程可能会将对“有根据的规范性”的理解同化为定居者对无根据或无地点的规范性的理解。这种同化将是切罗基哲学家布莱恩·亚兹·伯克哈特所说的“定居者哲学监护”的一种操作。出于这个原因,本文认为,有意义地“本土化”哲学课程的工作必须首先批判性地调查无地规范性作为殖民者殖民扩张和消除动力的功能。
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
Indigenizing Philosophy on Stolen Lands: A Worry about Settler Philosophical Guardianship
Many Canadian universities have taken heed of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s recommendations to ‘Indigenize’ their curricula. The worry remains, however, that the language of reconciliation is empty rhetoric that “metaphorizes” decolonization, rather than responds to the demands of Indigenous communities for self-determination and land back. This paper aims to consider what the activity of ‘Indigenizing’ academic philosophy (and ethics more specifically) might involve. In particular, it raises the worry that the integration of Indigenous philosophy into ethics curriculum might assimilate an understanding of “grounded normativity” into settler understandings of groundless or placeless normativity. Such an assimilation would be an operation of what Cherokee philosopher Brian Yazzie Burkhart calls “settler philosophical guardianship.” For this reason, this paper contends that the work of meaningfully ‘Indigenizing’ philosophical curricula must first critically investigate an account of placeless normativity as a function of the settler colonial drive for expansion and elimination.
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
Pluralist
Pluralist PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
39
期刊最新文献
Casting a Vote for Subordination Using a Slur Affective Foundation of Society in Nietzsche's Philosophy Philosophy and the Modern African American Freedom Struggle: A Freedom Gaze The Dramatization of Absolute Idealism: Gabriel Marcel and F. H. Bradley Collective Regret and Guilt and Heroic Agency: A Pro-Existential Approach
×
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