认识论与统治:拉丁美洲非殖民化理论中的知识殖民命题问题

IF 0.5 4区 社会学 Q3 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Dados-Revista De Ciencias Sociais Pub Date : 2020-01-01 DOI:10.1590/dados.2020.63.4.221
P. Chambers
{"title":"认识论与统治:拉丁美洲非殖民化理论中的知识殖民命题问题","authors":"P. Chambers","doi":"10.1590/dados.2020.63.4.221","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Epistemology and Domination: Problems with the Coloniality of Knowledge Thesis in Latin American Decolonial Theory Latin American decolonial theory is built around the thesis of the “coloniality of knowledge”, which claims that the socio-political domination of Latin America and other regions of the global periphery by European countries and the United States is directly related to the initial colonial imposition and subsequent cultural reproduction of so-called “Western epistemology” and science. I argue that the epistemological claims of four decolonial thinkers (Aníbal Quijano, Walter Mignolo, Enrique Dussel, Santiago Castro-Gómez) that make up the coloniality of knowledge thesis are problematic for several reasons: they are based on distorted and simplistic readings of Descartes, Hume and other Enlightenment figures; they make contentious generalizations about so-called Western epistemology; and they ultimately lead to epistemic relativism, which is a problematic basis for the social sciences and, contrary to decolonial aspirations, renders the subaltern unable to speak.","PeriodicalId":51809,"journal":{"name":"Dados-Revista De Ciencias Sociais","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Epistemology and Domination: Problems with the Coloniality of Knowledge Thesis in Latin American Decolonial Theory\",\"authors\":\"P. Chambers\",\"doi\":\"10.1590/dados.2020.63.4.221\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Epistemology and Domination: Problems with the Coloniality of Knowledge Thesis in Latin American Decolonial Theory Latin American decolonial theory is built around the thesis of the “coloniality of knowledge”, which claims that the socio-political domination of Latin America and other regions of the global periphery by European countries and the United States is directly related to the initial colonial imposition and subsequent cultural reproduction of so-called “Western epistemology” and science. I argue that the epistemological claims of four decolonial thinkers (Aníbal Quijano, Walter Mignolo, Enrique Dussel, Santiago Castro-Gómez) that make up the coloniality of knowledge thesis are problematic for several reasons: they are based on distorted and simplistic readings of Descartes, Hume and other Enlightenment figures; they make contentious generalizations about so-called Western epistemology; and they ultimately lead to epistemic relativism, which is a problematic basis for the social sciences and, contrary to decolonial aspirations, renders the subaltern unable to speak.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51809,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Dados-Revista De Ciencias Sociais\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Dados-Revista De Ciencias Sociais\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1590/dados.2020.63.4.221\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dados-Revista De Ciencias Sociais","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/dados.2020.63.4.221","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

认识论与支配:拉丁美洲非殖民化理论是围绕“知识的殖民性”这一命题建立起来的,该命题认为,欧洲国家和美国对拉丁美洲和其他全球边缘地区的社会政治统治与最初的殖民强加和随后的所谓“西方认识论”和科学的文化再生产直接相关。我认为,四位非殖民化思想家(Aníbal Quijano, Walter Mignolo, Enrique Dussel, Santiago Castro-Gómez)的认识论主张构成了知识的殖民性命题,这些认识论主张是有问题的,原因如下:它们是基于对笛卡尔、休谟和其他启蒙运动人物的扭曲和过分简单化的解读;他们对所谓的西方认识论进行了有争议的概括;它们最终导致了认识论的相对主义,这是社会科学的一个有问题的基础,与非殖民化的愿望相反,它使底层人民无法说话。
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
Epistemology and Domination: Problems with the Coloniality of Knowledge Thesis in Latin American Decolonial Theory
Epistemology and Domination: Problems with the Coloniality of Knowledge Thesis in Latin American Decolonial Theory Latin American decolonial theory is built around the thesis of the “coloniality of knowledge”, which claims that the socio-political domination of Latin America and other regions of the global periphery by European countries and the United States is directly related to the initial colonial imposition and subsequent cultural reproduction of so-called “Western epistemology” and science. I argue that the epistemological claims of four decolonial thinkers (Aníbal Quijano, Walter Mignolo, Enrique Dussel, Santiago Castro-Gómez) that make up the coloniality of knowledge thesis are problematic for several reasons: they are based on distorted and simplistic readings of Descartes, Hume and other Enlightenment figures; they make contentious generalizations about so-called Western epistemology; and they ultimately lead to epistemic relativism, which is a problematic basis for the social sciences and, contrary to decolonial aspirations, renders the subaltern unable to speak.
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
Dados-Revista De Ciencias Sociais
Dados-Revista De Ciencias Sociais SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
23
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍: Dados - Revista de Ciências Sociais is a quarterly publication of the Instituto Universitário de Pesquisas do Rio de Janeiro (IUPERJ) aiming at publishing original articles in the area of social sciences. IUPERJ is the social sciences research organ of the Universidade Candido Mendes - UCAM. Opinions and concepdados expressed in signed articles are exclusive responsibility of the authors. Published from 1966, the journal"s abbreviated title is Dados, the form that should be used in bibliographies, footnotes, and bibliographical references and strips.
期刊最新文献
Bancada Feminina e o Aborto: Os Pronunciamentos das Mulheres na Câmara dos Deputados do Brasil e do Uruguai Distinções, Mediações Excludentes e Desigualdades: a Governança da Saúde Reprodutiva de “Cadastradas Difíceis” Preferências e Politização do Judiciário no Brasil Contemporâneo: Uma Análise de Casos de Combate à Corrupção Arranjo Federativo e Desigualdades em Saúde no Brasil e na Argentina Geo-Politizando los Espacios Intermedios del Sistema-Mundo: Semicentros y Semiperiferias, Geoestrategias de Subordinación y de Autonomía en América Latina y Europa Meridional tras la Guerra Fría
×
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