{"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。
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.